Narrative:

Descending through 10;000 and with the airport in sight; so cal said we were following a boeing 737 3 miles ahead and 3;000 feet below. They asked if we had the airplane in sight; which we did. They then cleared us for a visual approach and ended the clearance by stating; 'do not descend below 7;000'. They then cleared the boeing for the visual and told them not to descend below 5;000. This caused confusion in our cockpit because it seemed like a conflicting clearance. We either assume responsibility for our separation from clouds and airplanes ('cleared visual approach'); or not. But an altitude restriction when cleared a visual began the cone of confusion. After reaching our respective altitudes (5;000 boeing and 7;000 us) both of us had to query the controller for permission for a further descent (confusion). We were handed over to tower and were told the boeing had a groundspeed of 116 knots. I told the tower our approach speed was 160knots. No response from tower. We were rapidly gaining on the boeing. I asked tower if they were landing on the left or right side. I was told they were landing on the right and we were cleared to land on the left. We continued with rapid closure and the lateral offset looked very close. I know ont is not certified for simultaneous/independent parallel operations. As we were approaching 1;300 feet; the boeing stated he had a TA (obviously generated by our closure rate as we had a significantly higher approach speed and we were starting to overtake him (he was at approx a right 2:30 position at this point). 1. Immediately after the boeing told tower he had a TA; we had a RA stating 'level off'. 2. I reported to tower; 'we have a RA'. 3. Controller came back; 'do you have the traffic in sight?' 4. As controller asked if we had the traffic in sight; RA changed to 'climb.' 5. I responded affirmative (he was abeam at this point) 6. Controller asked 'state intentions' 7. I responded; 'aircraft X going around'. 8. We executed a go around.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A Pilot reports of an airborne conflict on final with traffic slightly ahead for parallel runway. Aircraft received an RA and the pilot elected to go around.

Narrative: Descending through 10;000 and with the airport in sight; So Cal said we were following a Boeing 737 3 miles ahead and 3;000 feet below. They asked if we had the airplane in sight; which we did. They then cleared us for a visual approach and ended the clearance by stating; 'Do not descend below 7;000'. They then cleared the Boeing for the visual and told them not to descend below 5;000. This caused confusion in our cockpit because it seemed like a conflicting clearance. We either assume responsibility for our separation from clouds and airplanes ('cleared visual approach'); or not. But an altitude restriction when cleared a visual began the cone of confusion. After reaching our respective altitudes (5;000 Boeing and 7;000 us) both of us had to query the controller for permission for a further descent (confusion). We were handed over to tower and were told the Boeing had a groundspeed of 116 knots. I told the tower our approach speed was 160knots. No response from tower. We were rapidly gaining on the Boeing. I asked tower if they were landing on the left or right side. I was told they were landing on the right and we were cleared to land on the left. We continued with rapid closure and the lateral offset looked very close. I know ONT is not certified for simultaneous/independent parallel operations. As we were approaching 1;300 feet; the Boeing stated he had a TA (obviously generated by our closure rate as we had a significantly higher approach speed and we were starting to overtake him (he was at approx a right 2:30 position at this point). 1. Immediately after the Boeing told tower he had a TA; we had a RA stating 'level off'. 2. I reported to tower; 'We have a RA'. 3. Controller came back; 'Do you have the traffic in sight?' 4. As Controller asked if we had the traffic in sight; RA changed to 'climb.' 5. I responded affirmative (he was abeam at this point) 6. Controller asked 'State intentions' 7. I responded; 'Aircraft X going around'. 8. We executed a go around.

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.