Widebody; Low Wing; 3 Turbojet Eng
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 30; Flight Crew Total 15000; Flight Crew Type 30
Workload; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Human Factors; Procedure
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.
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.