21 Day European Whirwind tour

Yes, I would say your first draft has too many cities. You have 10 cities for 20 nights for an average of 2 nights per city. Realize that changing a city takes about half a day. So you will have an average of about 1.5 days to spend in each stop. And this doesn't even factor in unexpected delays such as a rail strike. I would reduce your itinerary to 5 cities/towns across 20 nights.

Depending on how you rearrange your itinerary, you should also fly open-jaw. For example, fly into Paris and return home from Prague. Much more efficient and it avoids backtracking.

ETA: Trust me, 10 cities in 20 days is really hectic and it will wear you down, no matter how high your enthusiasm is at the start. I would also set aside 3 days in the middle of the trip to recharge. Pick a beach or a mountain village with no must-see/do attractions and just sleep in, eat, read. RS calls it a vacation from your vacation.

Thanks, Eddie.

We already bought the flight. I looked at Open Jaw, but couldn't find much for deals. Found a round trip to paris 22 days apart, so that's what we have booked already.

Thing is.. we don't really care to see Paris much, besides maybe the Eiffel Tour.

I think we may very well cut Belgium altogether. And Salzburg may not actually be a stop on the way to Munich, just a day trip to Eagles Nest to experience the alps somewhere in the trip.

So then we essentially have Amsterdam-Prague-Budapest-Munich-Barcelona for our 5... just sort of flying in and out of Paris, and the Belgium and Salzburg were mostly thrown in because they are on the way.

Such high energy trips are very difficult to choreograph. Even though I've been to all these places but Barcelona, I wouldn't consider this itinerary by independent travel. To take such a trip really would need to be by an organized bus tour, and you'd need a separate vacation when you finished for rest.
I prefer to travel into one city and out of another--open jaw. And I like traveling in a straight line to cities that complement each other. I like itineraries like London--Paris--Barcelona. Or, Munich-Salzburg-Vienna. Or, Prague-Vienna-Budapest. Or, Venice-Florence-Rome. Or, Berlin-Dresden-Prague-Vienna. Most of the great cities of Europe are worthy of a 4 day minimum visit.
With the advent of budget European airlines and enough time, you could visit 3 great cities and then fly (cheap) to virtually any city in Europe on your way home.
It's really up to you to decide what's the most important cities to visit. When I'm looking to travel, I find Wikipedia great reads on cities and airports anywhere in the world.

You may be so jet-lagged that first day in Paris that you are practically sleepwalking, in which case you'll really not see Paris at all. Hotels are expensive there, and you might just as well skip the city with the current itinerary, because I don't think you're going to be there long enough to get any sense of it at all.

I believe many people would vote to axe Brussels as a first step, as few consider it the most interesting destination in Belgium.

Although I'm a huge fan of Barcelona, it's geographically inconvenient on this trip. I'd save it for another trip which might include some other Spanish cities and/or some spots in southern France.

Those are the absolute minimum reductions I'd make to your list of destinations (though you could cut two different cities instead). Then redistribute those days among the other cities, especially Paris. You lose many hours every time you move to a new city, especially when the cities are large (as yours are, except for Salzburg) and you may have quite a trek between your hotel and the train station or airport. You're giving these fabulous cities inadequate time, and you're going to run yourself ragged. Three weeks is a very long time for such a rushed trip when the target cities are large (that makes quite a difference).

Since you say you're more interested in the local culture than a bunch of big tourist sights, I'd like for you to have a little more small-town time, not just Salzburg. You're basically hopping from capital city to capital city, and I think you get a better feel for a country in smaller towns. You might make a daytrip from at least one of your remaining stops.

And I agree that it would be a good idea to try to find a multi-city/open-jaw flight so you do not need to return to Paris.

I added number of nights to your initial itinerary plan. I'm sorry that you're flying to Paris if you don't particularly want to be there.

Taking the connecting train from Brussels Midi/South station to Brugge requires minimal effort - one hour on a direct train that departs several times per hour. The pay off is worth it, even if a certain movie implied that Brugge is a "hell hole." From Brugge to Amsterdam, it may make sense to connect trains at Antwerp instead of Brussels, but confirm that closer to your travel date, since I didn't find what I expected in a search today.

I agree that this is way too much in the time you have. Except that it's perfect for a whirlwind tour. If your goal is to get a basic flavor of each locale, I say go for it!

If this is your first visit to Europe, this itinerary will serve as a very broad overview. You'll discover which places you love and want to go back to see more of at a more leisurely pace.

However, if I were going to do an itinerary like this, I'd do it on a tour. There are just so many logistical issues involved in a whirlwind itinerary. When you're on a tour, those details are taken care of for you. You are dropped off and picked up right at your hotel. Doing this independently will require you to figure out not only transportation between cities, but how to go between your hotels and the train or bus station or airport. Tours can schedule lots of locations in less time because they aren't worried about getting lost or figuring out the local metro or bus or tram when you arrive in each new city.

Rick's Best of Europe in 21 days has 11 destinations, though it is very different from your itinerary and might not hit your bucket list places. But you can probably find a similar tour that will be close to your itinerary. It is something to consider.

If you are committed to traveling independently, you should strongly consider cutting this back to no more than 7 destinations (3 nights average per location).

I agree with FastEddie's comments.

Your wife is right - Brugge is very nice, and if she wants to see it you should make time for it.

Paris = 4 nights min. normally but maybe 3 nights is OK since you aren't into museums?

I'd consider axing 1 or 2 of the city-too-far destinations - Barcelona (a mecca for pickpockets anyway) for example.

Also, flying within Europe eats up a lot of time.

"We're really just looking for different cultures in general.... just... want to experience different regions/cultures. A lot of the time will just be walking the city, checking out the culture."

I'm not quite sure what it is you plan to do to absorb the cultures. There's not enough time in each country. And you've chosen major cities, places where life is sort of metro-European-homogeneous. One think you can do is exchange the big cities for some small towns that are less impacted by modernity and tourism. Munich isn't Germany... Visit the Mosel River Valley or the Black Forest, for example, places where families still own the same homes, vineyards and farms they've owned for hundreds of years. Where will you tour castles?? The Mosel Valley is good for that as well, by the way:

Burg Eltz
Cochem, a Mosel wine town with nice half-timbered buildings

Another thing you can do is time your visit with local festivals - wine fests, beer fests, spring fests... these are fun and usually include some historic traditions. (WHEN is your trip, anyway?) Or visit some of the open-air museums where culture really is on display. The Open-Air museum of the Netherlands, or the Vogtsbauernhof in Gutach (Black Forest) Germany, are good examples.

"I want to see the alps somewhere."

I'd suggest the more dramatic Swiss Alps over the Austrian variety. Try the Lauterbrunnen area.

Here's my suggestion. All by train.

Fly into A'dam, 3 nights
Brugge, 2 nights
Paris, 3 nights
Mosel Valley (Cochem) 2 nights
Lauterbrunnen, 3 nights
Gutach, 2 nights
Munich, 2 nights
Prague, 3 nights, Fly out of Prague

I would look at booking 'open jaw' flights - in to Amsterdam and out of Munich. It makes no sense flying in/out of Paris when you don't plan any real time there. Stick to the trains, and include Berlin and Vienna, at the expense of Brugge and Barcelona.

Amsterdam (3 nights)
Berlin (3 nights)
Prague (3 nights)
Budapest (3 nights)
Vienna (3 nights)
Salzburg (2 nights)
Munich (3 nights)

Wow! Thank you all so much, this is fantastic information. I'll certainly be sitting down with my wife and figuring this out.

I didn't mean I don't want to see Paris. I do. It's the epitome of Europe, and I need to at the very least experience the Eiffel Tower at night. I just think that'll be about it. And I already booked the round trip. I'm doing it because we're on a budget and I found round trip tickets for under $450.

Here are my thoughts on all of your responses:

• If we do Belgium (which I'm strongly thinking of cutting), Brugge it is. You bring up a fantastic point that we're only seeing big cities. The reason we didn't end up with smaller cities is a) we hear the most about the big cities, so naturally it's the ones we want to experience and b) transportation is a bit easier. But I do think it's worth hitting some smaller cities, and I'll get some in, one way or anohter.

• Barcelona is most likely gone. I had been thinking it's pretty far out of the way already. We purposefully left out Italy and Greece because we intend on doing a mediterannean trip someday. Barcelona will be added to that (hopefully) future itinerary.

I think my wife's biggest struggle right now (I do to, but to a lesser extent) is that we almost feel obligated to hit the major cities: Paris, London, Amsterdam, Prague... But I do think we'd enjoy some smaller cities in there as well. So we'll certainly be working on it. It's a work in progress!

And this is in June. So Barcelona may be a bit hot anyways...

And Lane... that's the first support I got for this truly "whirlwind" tour! I'm almost tempted to see if my wife wants to do it almost as-is anyways. We do have great endurance when it comes to traveling, and while we haven't done Europe, we have done NYC, DC, Boston, and other large cities in just a couple days. It's usually enough to hit a few of the big attractions. And I find just walking a city, or even traveling, pretty relaxing.

I'll recommend 1 or 2 cities though. And putting some smaller ones in.

Thanks again, everybody!

Kevin, a 21-day whirlwind is very different from a 3-day or 6-day whirlwind.

My first trip was a bunch of capital cities strung together, so I understand the urge to visit the places that get full chapters in the European guidebooks! Just tell yourself that you don't have to go to all those places on the same trip. It's nice to be able to enjoy a slower pace for a day here or there, and the best place to find it is not in Paris or Munich or Prague.

Since you have bought your tickets you are stuck. I would cut the number of cities. This sort of sounds like my college trip to Europe, constantly moving and less time seeing. We spent more time changing locations than we did seeing cities. With so little time in each city, you will not get the culture of the city, just the culture of the neighborhood you are staying in. You need to pick a rest day every 5 to 7 days to relax and do laundry. If you are in a city a half day how are you going to do laundry? With your pace are you planning on staying in Hostels?

I agree with the posts above. Salzburg and Eagles Nest are not the Alps, they are small green hills. For real Alps head to Murren in the Lauterbrunnen valley in Switzerland and rest for two or three days.

Since you dont want to see Paris, when you land take the train to Brugge and spend the night there. I have done it as a day trip from Paris. It is an hour from Brussels. Spend time there then on to Amsterdam.

I would cut Barcelona since it is so far from everything else and you will lose two days just getting there and back.

Since you don't like Paris, a day trip to the Castles of the Loire Valley is a nice change of pace from the Cities you are visiting. You can also do a day trip to the Palace of Versailles to see how the other half lived before the Revolution.

You can do your whirlwind but it will be very tiring. If so still include Murren. It is such a change from everything else.

OK. I'm with you now. How about ... ??

Arrive in Paris, then directly by train to Belgium (2 nights)
Train to Amsterdam (3 nights)
Train to Berlin (3 nights)
Train to Prague (3 nights)
Train to Vienna (2 nights) or Salzburg (2 nights)
Train to Budapest (3 nights) or Munich (3 nights)
Fly to Paris (4 nights)
Depart from Paris

Consider using London and Amsterdam as bases for day trips to smaller places. Bath, Dover, Oxford, Cambridge, Salisbury, Canterbury, and others are all daytripable from London. The list of possible cities from Amsterdam is even larger. See two smaller places from each.

Paris 5
Bruges 2

Amsterdam 6
London 6
Paris 1

I would cut Budapest and Barcelona, they appear to be the long stretches. Or do it all and have a blast! No reason you can't, if you enjoy the pace.

I would just point out that whirlwind in the U.S. is a lot different from whirlwind in Europe. In the U.S., you have a common language, common culture, familiar transportation and currency, and most cities are well planned and easy to navigate. Also, it doesn't sound like you've done a 3-week whirlwind tour. The longer the trip, the more it can be tiring and you'll need to consider ordinary things like laundry.

When you get to Europe, that's all gone. Everything is going to slow you down imperceptably, but the effect is cumulative and everything will probably take longer than you planned. You have to get used to the different coins (and you've got 2 countries that aren't on the euro). It's hard to find street signs. Historic centers are a crazy-quilt patchwork of small, winding streets. Signage is different in each place and it's all in foreign languages. What does a tram or bus stop look like? Every time you change locations, you have to start your journey by picking your luggage and end it by dropping off your luggage, time-consuming.

Prague to Budapest is nearly 7 hours on the train. Budapest to Salzburg is over 5.

Just a few added points

1) Have you been to Paris before? Not sure why you aren't spending much time there?

2) You are going to Belgium and not going to Brugges. If you have a choice between Brussels and Brugges, go to Brugges.

3) Skip Barcelona and save it for a trip to Spain. Love Barcelona, but Madrid and Seville are more impressive than Barcelona.

The second paragraph in Chani's post more or less describes why I find Europe so much an adventure. I love all those things! But she's right about their slowing you down.

Another point is that you see/absorb the most when you wander around on foot. Sights in large cities can be quite far apart. If you choose to walk, as I nearly always do, the quick visit to a church may take 60 to 90 minutes, or longer if you get distracted by picturesque streets along the way. Aimless wandering is the best part of a trip for me.

Excellent info.

Mentioned some of your advice to my wife, and she is open ears, too. A few things:

• I think we really will spend at least a couple of days in Paris. I made it sound like we were going to just skip it, but that's where the flight is, and we really have no reason not to spend time there. My sister (who has similar interests as us) visited Paris for 3 days and said it was honestly too much, so we were somewhat taking her advice. But I think we'll see for ourselves.

• We're cutting Barcelona. She was OK with that. She has visited Barcelona before (studies abroad in spain and took a weekend trip there) but would really like to see more of Spain/Portugal in the future. That saves a lot of travel time.

• We may cut Budapest, too. Maybe go straight from Prague to Salzburg.

• I LOVE the idea of smaller cities along the way, or a "vacation from the vacation," but I guess I'm not exactly sure how to do that... I see some awesome recommendations of small towns in Switzerland, etc. But I guess the reason I was concerned is travel logistics. As far as I can tell, most of my cities I had selected have direct routes and relatively cheap travel. Getting almost anywhere to Murren requires a flight to Bern, a train to interlaken, then a bus to Murren. Then the inverse when we leave. I guess it's do-able, just seems intimidating to me. I'm sure other small cities are similar? Any other suggestions for smaller cities? I've seen Cesky Kremlov pop up a lot in blogs and forums, too.

Thank you all again for the fantastic advice!! It's certainly a work in progress!

I haven't taken my trip yet so I may not be the best source of information but for what it's worth, my fiance and I are doing a three-week trip for our honeymoon and we faced the same problem in wanting to work in a few smaller towns/cities along the way to avoid burn out but had the same logistical concerns as you. One thing we settled on is spending a few nights in Normandy before we head to Paris--this might not appeal to you (my fiance is really excited about the WWII history there so that's mostly what led us to go there) but it seems to be pretty easy to get to from Paris. We're staying in Bayeaux and there is a train from Paris. From what I understand, once you get to the region the transportation is not as easy in between the towns, but if you wanted to just escape the city for a few nights and didn't mind staying in one location it might be something to look into. :)

I don't have recent experience in the areas you are considering except for Berlin, but here are a few thoughts:

• Just being in Switzerland is expensive, not even considering the travel costs. There are transportation passes/cards that are money-savers for some travelers (though likely not on a very short trip). This might be an area to leave for another trip.

• There must be picturesque mountain towns not terribly far from Salzburg and Vienna, and I know I've seen suggestions on this forum for nice side-trips from Munich, including the Tegernsee, which is just over an hour away by bus.

• There are many beautiful places around the Bodensee. Lindau is less than 2-1/2 hours from Munich by train. Americans tend to ignore this huge lake; the Germans, Swiss and Austrians know better.

• There are many picturesque smaller cities and towns in the Netherlands, and nothing is all that far from Amsterdam. Day trips would be easy. Someone recently noted that it was practical to stay in Haarlem (which I've never seen) and take day trips to Amsterdam, which has more expensive hotel rates.

• The eastern part of Germany has a lot of beautiful towns, most not overrun by American tourists. Three that I've visited are within about three hours of Berlin (I'd want at least one night in any of these cities): Quedlinburg, Görlitz and Erfurt. Quedlinburg is the most obviously touristy, but it is stunning. It has a castle, a nice cathedral with a very impressive treasury (Google for American connection) and the Feininger gallery (modern art). The tourist office rents audio guides, and at least in high season there's a daily English-language walking tour.

• I'm certain there are other options, perhaps just a bit less spectacular, quite a bit closer to Berlin. Maybe Potsdam would fill the bill. It's a very quick trip from Berlin. I've read that it is a pretty town in addition to having the palaces.

Having just got back from an Italy, Switzerland, Germany trip, I would definitely NOT add Switzerland to this itinerary. Save it for another trip.

I like the way you are pairing down the locations. I have been going to Europe every year for the past twelve years and it is still an adjustment every single time. I don't plan much at all the first couple of days because jet lag can really take a toll, especially mid trip when the cumulative nights of interrupted sleep add up.

Munich and Salzburg can be combined into one stop. They are a little over an hour apart by train and one can be a day trip from the other. You have lots of Alpine day trips available from either of those locations.

Lastly, I would suggest at least calling the airline and checking on the change fee for a different return airport. It may be less than or the same price as your hopper flight back to Paris.

April, that's a great idea! I'm going to ask about the change fee. I have my doubts they will exchange the flight though, since we got such a deal. $430 each, round trip from Chicago to Paris. But like I always say, Questions are free, only answers cost money!

Thanks!

Hi Kevin,
I have taken two big whirlwind tours like this each one about two weeks and about 6 stops each. I agree with Lane about this being a great way to get a taste of each city. I was able to get a feel for each city/area and then as I returned on subsequent trips, I had a much better idea of where I wanted to spend my time and what I could pass on. As others have mentioned it is beneficial to do this type whirlwind tour with a tour company simply because they can manage all of the logistics and the transportation aspects which tend to be the most time consuming. But if your ambitious and adventurous enough to make it work on your own, I say go for it! You will definitely learn a lot about logistics and transportation and everything else that will make future travels easier. To me experiencing something is the best way to learn.

I have found that in the touristy areas around the major attractions, most people speak at least a little bit of English, so if you are willing to learn a few basic phrases for each of the languages you will encounter in combination with this you will be okay. If you prepare yourself by doing lots of research and have good guide books and maps you can do easily prepare for a lot of the transportation and other issues like getting tickets to places that might arise. Whatever you decide, I hope you have an enjoyable trip full of amazing adventures :-)

With an airfare like that I'd backtrack to Paris too. Open-jaw is usually a better option for a trip like this, but you've got a golden goose with that airfare!

Generally I agree with all the comments above about too many stops, too little time in each. Cutting Barcelona helps. Adding time in Paris, since you'll be there twice for flights, also makes sense, at the beginning or end or both. Switzerland is one of the most expensive countries in Europe. And just moving around, which your itinerary does a lot of, costs money as well as time and energy.

We found Salzburg somewhat disappointing, not being Sound of Music fans, though we spent only part of a day there. The scenery is very nice but as another poster said not really "the Alps" as much as other places.

Hope this helps. You'll get lots of comments and advice, mostly good I'm sure and all well-intended, but in the end you have to be happy with your own plans.

Ang, thanks! Hearing from people who have done it is reassuring. We haven't done extended trips obviously, this is our first time in Europe, so I just hope i'm not overdoing it. But we did NYC in 4 days (and were honestly ready to go home after 3), Boston in 2 days, and DC in one day. We love being on the go, and I'm sure I can figure out a lot of the logistics ahead of time!

Dick, thanks for the input. That's sort of why I was considering Salzburg just a "day trip on the way to Munich". I thought about just a day trip to Eagles Nest to get at least a taste of the alps.

As far as small Swiss towns, etc... man, I don't know. As cool as they are, it's a flight, a train, a bus, expensive lodging and food... just seems like a lot of work to get there. Maybe we'll do a winter ski trip there someday or something instead. I'd love to experience the Alps, but it needs to be somewhat easy and inexpensive for a traveler to get there, too, you know?

You don't necessarily have to stay in a small, hard to get to, town to experience the Alps. We stayed in Lucerne ( mid-sized city) and loved it, including the city itself and a boat ride on the lake. An excursion up one of the nearby mountains (Pilatus, Rigi, Titlis) will give you gorgeous, expansive views of the surrounding mountains and the ride up/down, whether by gondola, rack railway, etc is half the fun. I don't how any place in Switzerland fits with your proposed itinerary but if you decide to go that route Lucerne is easy to get to by train.

Kevin, I totally dig your enthusiasm. You can make your original work itinerary work, and if you pull it off, my hat's off to you.

I made up an itinerary with some of your particulars, and altered it to how I would do it with a first-timer to Europe. I left off Budapest (which I love, but is just too far out of the loops) and Barcelona (which I found was a dud and is also out of the way).
As far as navigating around the cities, Chani nailed it. Time can fly by trying to get from point A to point B.

D2 Land in Paris at 8 am. Take the train to Bruges. I once went from LA to Berlin, then got on a 5.5 hr train to Warsaw. Worked out really well (we never have any type of jet lag . . . just tired from staying up for a ton of hours, but the adrenaline keeps us going).
D3 Bruges
D4 Bruges w/day trip to Brussels, Antwerp, Ghent,
D5 Train to Amsterdam
D6 Amsterdam
D7 Amserdam w/day trip to Haarlem
D8 Fly to Prague
D9 Prague
D10 Prague w/day trip
D11 Train to Cesky Krumlov. Get your small town vibe here.
D12 Train to Vienna. (I know this wasn't on your list, but do some research and see if it's for you)
D13 Vienna
D14 Train to Salzburg
D15 Salzburg w/day trip to Berchtesgaden
D16 Train to Munich
D17 Munich
D18 Munich w/day trip to Dachau
D19 Fly to Paris
D20 Paris
D21 Paris
D22 You made it! Fly home!

OR, starting D13, boogie on over to Budapest and stay there for 3-4 days, fly to Paris, and enjoy your extra day in Paris.

About the Alps . . . and what I'm going to say may not be a popular view here.

Europe is chock-full of wonderful places, big cities, small towns, villages, art, architecture, thousands of years of history and ruins, great food and wine. Go there for that.

For scenic beauty, stay closer to home. The Canadian Rockies are as stupendous and majestic as mountains can be, with pristine lakes and forests and wildlife, lots of wildlife (bears, elk, bighorns, no cows). Fly to Calgary, rent a car and spend a week or two. Don't worry about backtracking to Calgary. You'll be driving on one of the most beautiful highways in the world and no matter how many times you do it, you'll want to stop and take photos, then turn around and drive it again. Canadian coins are a lot like the U.S. ones, nickels, dimes, quarters. And the Canadians speak English, more or less.

A couple of years ago we caught the train to Brussels at the CDG airport train station. This saved us a couple of hours of hassle. From Brussels we went directly to Brugges for three nights, including sleeping off the trip and time change the first night. The French National Railroad, SNCF, runs the trains from the airport, while Thalys has the contract from Gare du Nord in Paris.

This way you can save all your Paris time for the end and not drag suitcases around for only a one night's stay.