Narrative:

On initial climbout; passing about 3;500 ft; the flaps and slats fully retracted. Not more than a couple seconds later we received a caution message 'slat fail.' I had the captain verify there were no immediate action items. There were none; so the captain had me take over the radio calls and he referenced the QRH for slat fail. Upon review of the QRH procedure; we determined that with the slats failed at 0; we would only be able to get the flaps to extend to 2. This would obviously increase our landing distance; so instead of continuing to destination; we both decided the best course of action would be to return; and land on a long runway. While the captain was finishing the checklist and communicating the plan with our flight attendants; passengers; dispatch; and operations; I continued to fly. Due to our close proximity to the airport and the lengthy flap/slat fail checklist; I asked center for speed our discretion and we were vectored behind other arrival traffic. Once we caught up with our usual flows and checklists; we eventually were vectored on a left downwind. While on downwind; due to the rain showers in the area; we received light to moderate turbulence and light to moderate icing. Due to the icing; the 'stall prot ice' message appeared; so we had to take on the additional additives for that. Lastly; we discussed the need for crash fire rescue equipment upon arrival. Due to the non-normal situation; we advised approach to have crash fire rescue equipment waiting for us upon landing. At this point we were handed off to tower on a unique frequency. We were cleared to land. The captain preformed the landing; and we landed without incident. This airplane had an MEL for flap lo rate. Not sure if the extremely slow retraction of the flaps caused the slats to fail or not; but I do believe it was a contributing factor. The only suggestion I have is if this was caused due to the MEL on the flap motor; then I would say don't let the flap motor be MEL'd especially into airports with shorter runways. I can understand the need to get the airplane back to a maintenance base; but it should be fixed thereafter.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: EMB190 First Officer describes receiving a Slat Fail caution message during initial climb. QRH procedures are complied with and the crew elects to return to the departure airport due to the long runways. The flight had been dispatched with a flap motor on MEL.

Narrative: On initial climbout; passing about 3;500 FT; the flaps and slats fully retracted. Not more than a couple seconds later we received a Caution message 'SLAT FAIL.' I had the Captain verify there were no immediate action items. There were none; so the Captain had me take over the radio calls and he referenced the QRH for SLAT FAIL. Upon review of the QRH procedure; we determined that with the slats failed at 0; we would only be able to get the flaps to extend to 2. This would obviously increase our landing distance; so instead of continuing to destination; we both decided the best course of action would be to return; and land on a long runway. While the Captain was finishing the checklist and communicating the plan with our flight attendants; passengers; Dispatch; and Operations; I continued to fly. Due to our close proximity to the airport and the lengthy Flap/Slat Fail Checklist; I asked Center for speed our discretion and we were vectored behind other arrival traffic. Once we caught up with our usual flows and checklists; we eventually were vectored on a left downwind. While on downwind; due to the rain showers in the area; we received light to moderate turbulence and light to moderate icing. Due to the icing; the 'STALL PROT ICE' message appeared; so we had to take on the additional additives for that. Lastly; we discussed the need for CFR upon arrival. Due to the non-normal situation; we advised approach to have CFR waiting for us upon landing. At this point we were handed off to Tower on a unique frequency. We were cleared to land. The Captain preformed the landing; and we landed without incident. This airplane had an MEL for Flap Lo Rate. Not sure if the extremely slow retraction of the flaps caused the slats to fail or not; but I do believe it was a contributing factor. The only suggestion I have is if this was caused due to the MEL on the flap motor; then I would say don't let the flap motor be MEL'd especially into airports with shorter runways. I can understand the need to get the airplane back to a maintenance base; but it should be fixed thereafter.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.