Narrative:

Part 91K flight; upon arriving into vny (VMC 6 SM) cleared to land on [runway] 16R from the ILS 16R approach; we noticed a cessna 172 on a left downwind. On tower we heard that a cessna had us in sight and they were going to follow us. At that time; as we were stable; on course; on slope fully configured; I noticed the cessna on left downwind turning left base. They were headed right for us. I queried ATC about the traffic and they replied that they were following us; but they were talking about a cessna on right traffic but that wasn't clear. However; the traffic was at our 10 o'clock position; perpendicular to us; flying straight towards our final. We were about 2 miles out on final; about 800 ft AGL; 140 KTS. They were approaching within 50 ft vertically and within 1;000 ft horizontally from our aircraft; still flying towards us now approaching our 9 o'clock position. If they were landing 16L they seemed to be too close to us; so we executed a missed approach. We flew a right traffic pattern at 2;000 ft per tower instructions. When we asked the tower about the traffic again; they claimed they were landing the left side and that traffic was on a different frequency; thus the confusion. However; we don't recall being told at anytime from tower that we were to look for traffic landing the parallel. I am not certain if we received a RA (resolution advisory) but I'm certain I heard traffic; traffic numerous times. With my workload so high I cannot recall if I heard the RA because we already had the traffic in sight and we were evading the situation. Upon landing; we called the tower and they apologized for not telling us about the traffic; but claimed it was very common for parallel operations in vny. He wasn't sure if the cessna ever had us in sight. Make sure the tower personnel are aware that separation requirements for these two runways are not acceptable distances for [company] operations and that better precautions should commence as soon as possible.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Corporate jet landing VNY executed a go around after being confused with regard to traffic. The Tower was referencing one Cessna while the flight crew was concerned over the proximity of another Cessna.

Narrative: Part 91K flight; upon arriving into VNY (VMC 6 SM) cleared to land on [Runway] 16R from the ILS 16R approach; we noticed a Cessna 172 on a left downwind. On Tower we heard that a Cessna had us in sight and they were going to follow us. At that time; as we were stable; on course; on slope fully configured; I noticed the Cessna on left downwind turning left base. They were headed right for us. I queried ATC about the traffic and they replied that they were following us; but they were talking about a Cessna on right traffic but that wasn't clear. However; the traffic was at our 10 o'clock position; perpendicular to us; flying straight towards our final. We were about 2 miles out on final; about 800 FT AGL; 140 KTS. They were approaching within 50 FT vertically and within 1;000 FT horizontally from our aircraft; still flying towards us now approaching our 9 o'clock position. If they were landing 16L they seemed to be too close to us; so we executed a missed approach. We flew a right traffic pattern at 2;000 FT per Tower instructions. When we asked the Tower about the traffic again; they claimed they were landing the left side and that traffic was on a different frequency; thus the confusion. However; we don't recall being told at anytime from Tower that we were to look for traffic landing the parallel. I am not certain if we received a RA (Resolution Advisory) but I'm certain I heard TRAFFIC; TRAFFIC numerous times. With my workload so high I cannot recall if I heard the RA because we already had the traffic in sight and we were evading the situation. Upon landing; we called the Tower and they apologized for not telling us about the traffic; but claimed it was very common for parallel operations in VNY. He wasn't sure if the Cessna ever had us in sight. Make sure the Tower personnel are aware that separation requirements for these two runways are not acceptable distances for [company] operations and that better precautions should commence ASAP.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 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.