CRAZY or OK 18 day itinerary?

You have some fantastic places on your itinerary - all of them, actually - but I think that some of these places deserve more time. And the pace sounds frantic - I'd probably drop in my tracks by about day 5. I find that travelling from city to city is quite tiring - lugging bags, waiting for trains, etc., even if it's an overnight train that you'll sleep on. Hence, I prefer to spend more time in each city, allowing time for more than just sightseeing, but also enjoying cafes, shops, and just getting a little lost and seeing what you discover. (Regarding that last idea - be sure to pick up a business card from the hotel where you're staying so that if you get really lost, you can get directions - or take a cab - back.)

I am definitely one of those travelers who often times sees more places on a trip than many of the other posters here, but this makes even me crazy. I would say this might be almost impossible unless you want to spend all your time on trains, cabs and buses. I have been to all the locations you are going and cannot begin to explain the amount of time it takes just getting oriented and finding your way to your hotel... there are so many logistical issues. I very rarely say this, but I think you need to try to prioritize and come up with a more realistic itinerary. If you were on a tour it might be doable (although probably not pleasant) but with all the travel on your own it will probably be grueling.

Check your math. You arrive on the 13th. You depart on the 29th. How many days is that? Hint: it's not 18. I honestly believe that you shouldn't count either the day you arrive form the US, nor the day you depart, no matter what times the flights are. It's just not realistic. Looks to me like you have 15 days. You are trying to see London, Paris the Swiss Alps, Venice, Rome, Munich, Vienna, Amsterdam, plus a couple side trips - in just over 2 weeks. What's wrong with this picture? Sounds like my idea of hell. Methinks you need to cut out most of this itinerary. With 2 weeks + 1 day, I'd pick one of the following: London+Paris+Amsterdam, or Paris+Amsterdam+Swiss Alps, or Rome+Venice+Vienna OR Munich, or
Munich+Vienna+Venice Sorry, I know that's not what you wanted to hear, but you did ask...

I agree with the others. For a first trip, this is way too much, too fast (and I like to keep moving, too). Besides the logistics of getting from place to place, remember that you will be doing this in a place where they don't speak English (though you will undoubtedly encounter people who do, you can't count on it). It's a lot more stressful than you realize to not be able to easily read signs, ask questions, etc. You mention taking the "earliest train" a lot, but the earliest train might not be all that early, which would cut into your sightseeing time. As for the night trains, many people here report that they find them difficult/impossible to sleep on, which could leave you at less than your best the following day. I think you would be happier with your trip if you cut down the number of destinations and spend more time in each area.

Overly ambitious.

Wow! This is an awesome forum! Thank you for all of the replies and suggestions. After reading everyone's replies, we are going to hit the study guides and cut our cities down a bit. Probably will eliminate Switzerland and Munich. (Clarification: Really have only 16 days as the 12th and the 29th are entire travel days). Thank you again for all the input. Really wanted to run this by experienced individuals before making reservations. Glad we did.

You could take the Paris-Rome overnight train; leaves Paris at 6:54 pm, arrives Rome 10:12 am. Be advised that private sleeper cabins on this train (and all Italian trains) are unavailable now due to a contracting dispute, so couchettes are the only option. That only gives you a half day in Rome on the arrival day, but it probably still saves daylight sightseeing hours vs. a flight. I've always managed to get 5-6 hours of sleep on night trains, enough to tour the whole next day without feeling bad. It did feel a bit odd the first time trying to sleep on a moving train in a little room with five strangers, but you get used to it. Oh, and bring ear plugs.

You dont mention what you are doing with your luggage. For example, arrive in London, train to Warwick, tour Warwick, then back to London and check into your hotel. Even if you are travelling solely with everything in one back pack, this could get difficult. Have you checked what you do with a backpack at Warwick castle? 19th- How do you get from Gimmelwald to Milano and thn Rome. Not clear

Without any intention of being rude or aggressive, this sounds more like a transportation-geek schedule for one that wants, as a hobby, to spent as much time as possible in trains. There is nothing wrong with that, as I myself love, as a hobby, driving far away, multiple days, for the mere sake of driving, but as a tour of European destinations, it its way, way too much. Things like "cross English Channel as early as possible" involves plenty of time. Don't let you be deceived by 2h10 travel time: you need to arrive 30 min before departure + travel time London hotel-St. Pancras + travel t time Gare du Nord-Paris hotel + check-out + check-in... takes easily 5h

"Probably will eliminate Switzerland and Munich." This will save you a lot of money on railpasses, which will be expensive and waste your time, and you can add days in each place. Much more doable now. You should fly the long distances to give you more feet-on-the-ground time. 16 nights, right? 10/13-16: Warwick and London 10/17: FLY to Rome or Venice (Ryanair has a 36-GBP fare from London; stay near Stansted airport the night before for the cheapest early a.m. flights.) 10/17-23: Rome and Venice. Train Rome to Venice or vice-versa. 10/24: FLY Rome or Venice to Paris (Ryanair has a 28-Euros from Venice, 21 from Rome.) 10/24-27 or 28: Paris 10/27: Train from Paris to A'dam (but for 1 day, why even go? Fly home from Paris if you can.) So forget the railpass. For the Ryanair flights, you're looking at maybe $100 each total; add about $100 for the Rome-Venice train and whatever it costs to get up to Warwickshire from London. You don't have to use Ryanair - check with other carriers here: www.whichbudget.com

I agree with Andre completely. I have heard numerous stories from travelers that attempted itineraries like yours, only to realize halfway through their trip that it wasn't quite what they thought. They ended up disappointed from spending all their time on the train. Also, why would you not make your travel path more efficient by flying into London (or Amsterdam) and out of Rome?

What Andre said! It is easy to underestimate the "real" travel time. Andre said, "cross English Channel as early as possible" involves plenty of time. Don't let you be deceived by 2h10 travel time: you need to arrive 30 min before departure + travel time London hotel-St. Pancras + travel t time Gare du Nord-Paris hotel + check-out + check-in... takes easily 5h" So for every change in location, figure at least half a day. Check out travel times easily on Rail Europe but don't buy your point to point tickets there. Check other train questions in previous posts for more info. Pick the fastest train. I am confused about taking a Milan to Rome overnight train. The fastest non stop trains are 3 + hours. And the last train leaves in mid evening. No overnight there. Do you already have your flights arranged? Arrive London, Depart Amsterdam? I would also skip Vienna (If I understand your itinerary)as well as Switzerland and Munich. If you take a look at a Europe Map you can see Vienna is an "outlier" city for your trip. The more you move around the more money you spend and the more time you lose. You will have 16 days for sightseeing + last day traveling back to US. If my suggestions make sense to you, you have 5 cities left, London, Paris, Venice, Rome, and Amsterdam. Awesome picks which deserve more than just a day or 2. And except for Venice to Rome by train, the other cities can be reached by discount airlines. Check www.skyscanner.com but note some airports are secondary airports way outside of town. Usually cheap flights and save you time. Just make sure you read the fine print on luggage size and weight. Even 5 cities is a lot to tackle with the travel time. If you incorporate some of the Helpline suggestions, please let us know what you decide. Bobbie .

Ok, lets see here. Warrick/London, Paris, Gimmewald, Rome, Venice, Vienna, Munich/Dachau, Amsterdam. This itinerary is approx 8-9 cities in 17 days or so. On this board, I think those that frequent it are the travel at a moderate pace type of crowd. I do not think you will get a positive answer in your favor here. Maybe on a "Lets Go" forum, you may be cheered on, as there are those who backpack all over Europe in a travel frenzy whirl wind. And they live to tell about it, I am sure. What I can tell you is that out of my past 6 trips to Europe, only one was a frenzy where I did 6 German cities in a 9 night trip. I really do not have much to show for it, other than a bunch of pictures I took at night because that was when I would arrive into these cities. So basically, I spent most of my vacation in restaurants, drinking beer, eating wurst, and seeing the city at night. Minimal to no museums. It was fun but I regret a lot about that trip because I spent most of it on trains and bars instead of sights and museums. And night time pictures typically don't come out too well.
As most people have told you, travel is exhausting. on my 18 day trip to Italy last year, where I did 6 cities, 2-4 nights each (small towns 2 night, major cities 3-4 nights), I still managed to get sick due to exhaustion. My travel theory is to see as much as I can, but don't kill yourself trying to see everything. I am very organized and create itineraries that are pretty busy but give myself some down time. So I basically sight see for 8 hours (like a job), and kick back and relax the rest of the evening. But I feel, no matter how ambitious one is, always give a big city 3-4 nights, and the smaller ones at least 2 nights.

Brendon Elizabeth This is a way to View your itinerary rather than just listing it. Use a paper or online calendar (so you can adjust easily and share). 1 - Put your international travel times on the calendar. 2 Put train times, using RailEurope or other train site. 3 Put the flight time from cities. Check Skyscanner.com for times and discount airline prices. 4 - - Don't forget to add these additional time-eating components to get the Real Time. For 1st city, add Customs and Immigration and transport time to hotel.
For others, add time from 1st hotel to airport/train, time to wait at airport/station before departure, and then station/airport to 2nd hotel. Figure half a day, I bet. 5 -Put Travel Day on each day you travel from one place to another or take a day trip. 6 - Once you have your itinerary more firmed up, check the major sites you want to see to make sure they are open on the days you are there. For instance, Paris museums closed Mon or Tues, Vatican closed Sun, etc.. And put the dates open and closed on the calendar so you won't forget. RS Guidebooks have a special BOX in the beginning chapters that show a summary of the open/closed days. By doing it this way, I find it easier to See how my time is spent. And then adjust accordingly. I advise my friends to do this to. Often, that is when they have their Ah Ha moment. Listing just doesn't do it. Hope this helps! Bobbie NOTE: This is virtually verbatim from a post I also used on the Western Europe response to Brendon.

You have already received lots of good advice here. So I will just suggest you take a look at the Rick Steves Tour, "My Way: Europe in 14 Days". It's a lower price than some of his other fully escorted tours; the good part for you is that Rick furnishes all the transportation and lodging, plus breakfast every day. That might make your trip a lot easier, since it's your first to Europe. The trip covers most of your desired destinations, but leaving out a few makes your trip more manageable. You could fly into London, spend 2 days there, take the Eurostar train to Paris, and begin the Rick Steves tour there. Fly home from Rome. Whatever you leave out that you originally wanted to see (Amsterdam), just put that on your list for your second trip to Europe. It gives you something to look forward to for next time.

If you've not booked yet, may I suggest fly into London and fly home from Rome. In that case, go in this order: London (as you already have it), Paris (16th-19), Gimmelwald (19-21), Munich(22-23), (night train to Venice) Venice (24-25), Rome (26-28). It's still awful busy. I would skip Amsterdam and do that another time. If you are already booked into London, home from Amsterdam, I'd suggest: London, Paris 16-19 (really, add a day) Lauterbrunnem/Gimmelwald 20-22 Munich/Dachau 23-24 Strasburg France or maybe Rothenburg, Germany 25-26 Night train to Amsterdam
Amsterdam (with day trips possible) 26-29 Leave Venice and Rome for another trip. Even by taking night trains, it's hard to accomodate. If, however, you are dead set on Venice and Rome, I'd suggest skipping Munich or Gimmelwald (or maybe both) and add some days there. Consider flying a cheap airline back up to Amsterdam from Rome or a night train (it'd be a long ride from Rome to Amsterdam though).