Narrative:

Descriptiongo-around due to wake turbulence.lax had an unusual configuration due to the temporary closure of runway 25R that morning. Visual approaches were conducted to runway 24R; 24L and 25L to improve acceptance rate.after the SADDE6 arrival we were vectored for a standard visual to 24R. While on downwind and in an appropriate position to begin a base turn; ATC asked if we had a B787 in sight on straight-in approach to 24L (closely spaced parallel). We both had the B787 in sight and said 'affirmative'. ATC then instructed us to turn right heading 160; maintain visual separation with B787; caution wake turbulence; cleared visual approach 24R'. I erroneously assumed that ATC had built-in the required wake turbulence separation (heavy-large; parallel runways separated by less than 2;500ft). Once lined up on final; we were in trail of the B787 by approximately 2 miles. With a 10kt crosswind from our left; the B787 wake turbulence kept drifting into our path. We felt it a couple of times between 2000 AGL and 1000 AGL with significant aileron input required to counter the effect. We adjusted our path above the glide slope and agreed that if it happened again below 500 AGL; we would initiate a go-around. The turbulence was felt again at 200ft and I initiated an uneventful go-around.causei feel that this could've been avoided by ATC at the outset. We were 'forced' onto the base leg immediately after reporting the B787 in sight. I assumed that ATC had factored in our respective speeds to achieve wake-turbulence separation. They apparently had not and we found ourselves 'boxed-in' by their vector. I realize that on a visual approach; it is the pilot's responsibility to ensure wake turbulence separation. However; for that to be possible; the pilot must be given the latitude to maneuver as necessary early enough in the process.I certainly could've not accepted the ATC clearance. However; I assumed that the controller had enough information about our respective tracks and speeds to make a good decision (most of the time they do).

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737 reported encountering wake turbulence in trail of a B787 on visual approach to LAX.

Narrative: DescriptionGO-AROUND DUE TO WAKE TURBULENCE.LAX had an unusual configuration due to the temporary closure of runway 25R that morning. Visual approaches were conducted to runway 24R; 24L and 25L to improve acceptance rate.After the SADDE6 arrival we were vectored for a standard visual to 24R. While on downwind and in an appropriate position to begin a base turn; ATC asked if we had a B787 in sight on straight-in approach to 24L (closely spaced parallel). We both had the B787 in sight and said 'affirmative'. ATC then instructed us to turn right heading 160; maintain visual separation with B787; caution wake turbulence; cleared visual approach 24R'. I erroneously assumed that ATC had built-in the required wake turbulence separation (heavy-large; parallel runways separated by less than 2;500ft). Once lined up on final; we were in trail of the B787 by approximately 2 miles. With a 10kt crosswind from our left; the B787 wake turbulence kept drifting into our path. We felt it a couple of times between 2000 AGL and 1000 AGL with significant aileron input required to counter the effect. We adjusted our path above the Glide Slope and agreed that if it happened again below 500 AGL; we would initiate a Go-Around. The turbulence was felt again at 200ft and I initiated an uneventful Go-Around.CauseI feel that this could've been avoided by ATC at the outset. We were 'forced' onto the base leg immediately after reporting the B787 in sight. I assumed that ATC had factored in our respective speeds to achieve wake-turbulence separation. They apparently had not and we found ourselves 'boxed-in' by their vector. I realize that on a visual approach; it is the pilot's responsibility to ensure wake turbulence separation. However; for that to be possible; the pilot must be given the latitude to maneuver as necessary early enough in the process.I certainly could've not accepted the ATC clearance. However; I assumed that the controller had enough information about our respective tracks and speeds to make a good decision (most of the time they do).

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.