EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Conflict Airborne Conflict; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
On short final we encountered wake turbulence from a heavy that had landed on the parallel 28R and I executed a go around. The controller told us to fly runway heading and maintain 3;000 ft. As we were climbing we received an RA for traffic that was in the departure corridor at 2;000 ft (a Cirrus). I followed the direction of the RA to descend; the controller gave us a heading of 265 and had the other aircraft do a 360; we then received another RA from the same aircraft when they turned back towards us and we started our climb. I had to descend further and once clear of the conflict we continued the climb as instructed. We were vectored for another visual approach and landed safely. The First Officer had the Cirrus in sight. Wake turbulence dictated a go around and a Cirrus in the departure corridor were the cause of this event. I always anticipate a missed/go around; however I don't believe ATC anticipated us going around and allowed the conflicting traffic to fly through the airspace. I am in no way blaming ATC because that may be standard practice for them.
ERJ-175 Captain reported executing a go-around on short final at SFO after experiencing wake turbulence from a heavy jet on the parallel runway; and during the go-around received an RA from a light aircraft transiting the airspace.