Narrative:

Flight was cleared for the civet 2 profile descent at lax with the transition to the ILS 25L approach. The profile was flown in compliance with all altitude and speed restrictions, and the transition to the 25L ILS was without incident. Outside the limma OM, approach control notified flight that a small aircraft was making a visual approach to runway 25R and that aircraft would be behind and to the right of flight during the approach. Neither pilot on flight ever had a visual reference with the small aircraft on approach to 25R, nor was any radio transmission made by flight acknowledging a visual reference. Inside the limma OM, at approximately 2000 ft, flight switched over to lax tower frequency on its own, as approach control had not instructed the flight to do so at that time. At approximately 1500 ft above the ground, flight received a conflict alert on the TCASII. It instructed flight to climb. The first officer reduced his rate of descent and was bringing the aircraft towards level flight. The captain notified lax tower of the conflict alert and asked about traffic. Tower said there was traffic on a VFR approach to the right of flight, but neither pilot on flight could see the traffic. At this time, the TCASII alert was instructing flight to increase rate of climb and the instrument showed an aircraft directly under flight. The captain instructed the first officer to go around at this time, which he did. During the go around and subsequent approach and landing all altitude, heading, and airspeed instructions were complied with by flight as issued by lax tower, departure, and approach control. Approach control should consider using more separation between TCASII equipped aircraft in VFR conditions. This is especially important on parallel runways which do not meet FAA mins for IFR simultaneous parallel approachs.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR FLC COMPLAINS OF APCH LNDG PROCS AT LAX WITH SMA SMT SEPARATION FROM ACR ACFT WITH TCASII ON MULTIPLE RWY OPS PARALLEL RWY WHICH, IN HIS CASE, CREATED THE NEED IN HIS MIND FOR AN EVASIVE ACTION ACFT MANEUVER CLB GAR.

Narrative: FLT WAS CLRED FOR THE CIVET 2 PROFILE DSCNT AT LAX WITH THE TRANSITION TO THE ILS 25L APCH. THE PROFILE WAS FLOWN IN COMPLIANCE WITH ALL ALT AND SPD RESTRICTIONS, AND THE TRANSITION TO THE 25L ILS WAS WITHOUT INCIDENT. OUTSIDE THE LIMMA OM, APCH CTL NOTIFIED FLT THAT A SMALL ACFT WAS MAKING A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 25R AND THAT ACFT WOULD BE BEHIND AND TO THE R OF FLT DURING THE APCH. NEITHER PLT ON FLT EVER HAD A VISUAL REF WITH THE SMALL ACFT ON APCH TO 25R, NOR WAS ANY RADIO XMISSION MADE BY FLT ACKNOWLEDGING A VISUAL REF. INSIDE THE LIMMA OM, AT APPROX 2000 FT, FLT SWITCHED OVER TO LAX TWR FREQ ON ITS OWN, AS APCH CTL HAD NOT INSTRUCTED THE FLT TO DO SO AT THAT TIME. AT APPROX 1500 FT ABOVE THE GND, FLT RECEIVED A CONFLICT ALERT ON THE TCASII. IT INSTRUCTED FLT TO CLB. THE FO REDUCED HIS RATE OF DSCNT AND WAS BRINGING THE ACFT TOWARDS LEVEL FLT. THE CAPT NOTIFIED LAX TWR OF THE CONFLICT ALERT AND ASKED ABOUT TFC. TWR SAID THERE WAS TFC ON A VFR APCH TO THE R OF FLT, BUT NEITHER PLT ON FLT COULD SEE THE TFC. AT THIS TIME, THE TCASII ALERT WAS INSTRUCTING FLT TO INCREASE RATE OF CLB AND THE INST SHOWED AN ACFT DIRECTLY UNDER FLT. THE CAPT INSTRUCTED THE FO TO GAR AT THIS TIME, WHICH HE DID. DURING THE GAR AND SUBSEQUENT APCH AND LNDG ALL ALT, HDG, AND AIRSPD INSTRUCTIONS WERE COMPLIED WITH BY FLT AS ISSUED BY LAX TWR, DEP, AND APCH CTL. APCH CTL SHOULD CONSIDER USING MORE SEPARATION BTWN TCASII EQUIPPED ACFT IN VFR CONDITIONS. THIS IS ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT ON PARALLEL RWYS WHICH DO NOT MEET FAA MINS FOR IFR SIMULTANEOUS PARALLEL APCHS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.