Europe travel in July 2019

Linda, that is not at all the way I would structure a 2-1/2 week trip. Way too many places and too far apart with time-consuming transportation legs to deal with. It would be difficult for me as a single, highly-experienced traveler to make that schedule work--not that I'd try to do so, because I'd want more time than you've allotted in every place you've named with the possible exception of Capri. Two days in London and 2 or 3 in Paris? Just no. I can't imagine getting a group of 5 (or is it 6?), including three teenagers, to jump through the necessary hoops to pull that trip off.

I'd go back to the drawing board and ask what is the #1 priority. (Looks like it may be Italy.) I'd then allow a reasonable amount of time for each place in Italy and see how much, if any, time I had left for other places. Take a look at a good guidebook. Read about all there is to see and do in each place. Then visit the Deutsche Bahn website to check on travel time by train. If you already have tickets into London and out of Rome, the best I can suggest is to give yourself more time in London (the arrival day is nearly worthless due to sleep-deprivation and jetlag) and then hop a budget flight to northern Italy.

Be very clear about exactly how much time you will have for this trip. How many nights will you spend in Europe--not counting the overnight flight? Every time you change hotels you lose half a day at a minimum. Often it is much longer. I hardly count those hotel-change days at all, and you have 6 of them.

You're moving a little fast there. Remember you lose the first and last days of every trip, and every move from city to city costs you a day. Great cities are best taken slowly. (Oops, I see someone above feels the same way.)
London and Paris are both 4 day cities at a minimum.
Flying from Paris to Venice would be preferable on a budget air carrier--2 day visit. (Paris-Venice is too far on a train and the routes are difficult.)
Then take the fast train down to Florence for 3 days. Excursions to the Tuscan countryside are great.
And finish out the remaining time in Rome which is a most important city in history, art, architecture, culture and food.
I'm sorry, but 2 1/2 weeks is just not enough time to add Naples and Capri.

Paris to Venice by train is not a difficult route, and I wouldn't say it's too far. There is a direct night train: https://www.thello.com/en/paris-venice/

Yep, acraven is spot-on above. Waaaay too many places, not enough time in them.

An inconvenient truth (which OP is not recognizing): every time you pick up and move, you will consume most (or all) of a day. Especially as an inexperienced traveler. So when you say "2 days here, 3 days there" you are failing to account for the travel (and associated tasks) time. Subtract one day from each stop - that's how much usable time you will actually have there. So when you allocate 2 days for London, you get one day there. 2 days in Florence, gets you one day in Florence.

Also - you need to start by being honest with yourself about how many days/nights you actually have in Europe. Don't count the day you arrive in Europe (you will be wiped out and will just struggle to stay awake until after dinner - which is exactly what you should do), likewise don't count your departure day - no matter what time your flights are scheduled.

With 2.5 weeks, stick to a much smaller area. Pick UK and France, or Pick Italy, but not all.

Way way too fast. Every move takes at least a half day to wake up, have breakfast, pack, check out, make your way to the train station then do the reverse. For every two night stop you have one full day in the city. You don't mention if this is your first trip to Europe. Is it possible, yes. You you enjoy it, I doubt it.

Your arrival day will be useless because of jet lag. Your departure day is lost because most flights from Europe early afternoon. So you just lost two days. That is seven locations in 16 or seven teen days. It sounds like you will walk by the outside of things and snap a selfie and move on. Part of the magic of Europe is to slow down and see how someone else does things. I would cut your list in half hit the big ones for your first trip. Paris, Murren Switzerland, Venice, and Rome. Skip London, Naples and Capri. London, Paris and Rome are vast and four day minimum. Murren Switzerland up in the mountains and Venice are two places unlike any other. Use Rome2rio to get a better idea of transit times. Please slow down. Most people who take such a fast paced trip dislike Europe. One question. When do you plan to do laundry? One roll around bag that fits into the overhead or monster suitcase. Everyone has to be able to carry their belongings. You might have a quick change of trains at a station in the middle of your trip.

As has already been stated, you haven’t allowed for travel time between locations. London and Paris are 4 full days each as an absolute minimum.

Allow all the family to have some input, but London/Paris/Rome will fill your trip as an example. Pick 4 locations maximum if you keep any of these three major spots.

Have you taken a look at what you will be doing in each city to determine that 2 days, 1 & 1/2 days is sufficient for what you want to see/do? Have you looked at the travel time (Train? Drive? Fly?) to determine if you really do have that 2 days or is it really 3 hours (2 spent eating dinner) and one full day? Have you read your travel guide for each place to know what sites are open/closed? You don't want to be in Paris on a Monday thinking that is the day your visiting Versailles.

This is my method for planning a trip and we like food, historical sites, walking tours, museums, live music and just walking around:
I always start a trip with a dream list of what I want to see in each place I plan on visiting (Guide books, Blogs, trip reports, you tube vidoes) . When i am done with my list I usually discover that it would take me about 3 months to see everything, so then I pick a top 10 things I want to do in each place and call then categorize my list into either A List (MUST do) or B List (would be great if we can fit this in too). Then I take my trip days and put them on a lined piece of paper to look something like this: Day 1 Travel day to London=London, Day 2 Tuesday=London, Day 3 Wednesday=Leave London and Eurostar to Paris, Day 4 Thursday=Paris etc. Then I start filling in what we plan to do each day using my A list, and then research if we CAN visit Versailles on Monday (no you can't) opps, okay now I need three Days in Paris not two if we want to fit in Versailles. My list is very fluid until I nail down each day and what we will do and I always have to leave something/someplace out and compromise due to my time limits. BUT I am a planner! This all goes on an excel spreadsheet and we stick to the plan and only plan ONE thing a day, the rest of the day we just let unfold.

As others have noted far too much in such a short period of time.

Things to keep in mind;

1.) the day of arrival and day of departure can't truly be considered days to see anything
2.) jet lag
3.) 2 days is NOT enough for London
4.) pass on Naples
5.) why the choice of these cities? Are there specific sights of interest that are "must" sees.
6.) each of these cities will be swamped with tourists. I get it, only time kids can travel but one needs to be prepared
for the masses and how long lines will be.
7.) You've asked for suggestions. Consult with the family and make a list of what MUST be seen. Then revamp the itinerary
realizing how much time traveling between cities will take.

Personally I'd either make this a trip to see Italy (Rome, Florence, Venice ) or do London and Paris and some day trips from each city ( Windsor Castle, Hampton Court, Brighton in the UK), (Versailles, Chateau de Chantilly, Giverny).

Research and cull. Don't try to cram too much into the first visit. You want to have fond memories.

Linda - great advice above. As you can read, all the experienced travelers are saying way too many places and too far apart. I took 4 teenagers and two adults with me this past June to Europe. We went to 3 cities over 14 days, not including the 2 travel days to Europe and back home. About 4-5 days in each city was about right (I would have preferred more, but obligations back home for some determined time limits).

Have you been to Europe before? Have your companions? Unless you have all been to the places you will visit, everyone will need time to orient themselves in each new city, explore, and enjoy - streets, public transportation, restaurants, and sights such as museums, palaces, architecture, and parks. You will also have to check in and check out of your hotels and travel to the next city.
As was recommended above, decide what you want to do in each city ahead of time, and plan a light itinerary, considering the time to and at each activity, and free time to just relax and enjoy being there, such as leisurely sipping coffee or wine at an outdoor café in Paris, or gelato in Rome.
Also consider the weather and crowds. July is peak tourist season and ALL the major cities and ALL the major sights will be packed, many shoulder-to-shoulder. And it will be warm to hot, especially in Italy. (I have enjoyed and recommend Italy, but I do not go there, Greece or southern Spain in summer - the teens can go later when they are adults and can go in spring or fall or winter.) If you haven't already booked your flights, consider a combination of big city and smaller towns nearby in the more northern part of Europe to relieve the stress of the city and enjoy more comfortable weather (although no guarantees). Look at the tour itineraries on this website and consider replicating part of one that you and your companions find interesting, such as a mix of London and smaller English countryside towns or Paris and Normandy, for example. Switzerland and Scandinavia are great summer locations, but more expensive - the teens can go when they are adults and earning their own money.

Also, some venues require advance booking, and museums are closed on certain days. Research.
If you feel you really have to see the big sights this trip, limit it to 3 max: Rome first (most southern) then Paris then London.
If you don't rush the days, everyone will enjoy the vacation more and will want to return to Europe later.

Linda, I'm just singing with the choir here: WAY too much for the time you have. I'm exhausted just looking at this schedule.

Arrival day is often a jet-lagged haze: doesn't count as a sightseeing day. In other words, you don't have 2 days for London, you have one full, non-jetlagged one. 2 nights anywhere is also just one full day of sightseeing,

As already pointed out, you lose 1/2 day or more with every location move you make. You'll also only move as fast as the slowest member of your group.

Very tight itineraries leave no room for anything to go awry...and things CAN go awry: strikes, weather, travelers tummy, the one day you have being the day the best attractions are closed...

Money/time spent dealing with an overload of transport can be better spent sightseeing and having fun!

So I'd cut it down. You need more time for London and Paris, and I'd add a day to Rome as well. Lausanne and Naples/Capri would be the first I'd cut from the list.

At the risk of piling on, what your propose looks like 3 episodes of The Amazing Race, not a family vacation.

You need to narrow the focus and geographic spread of your trip.

London-Paris-Venice Florence-Rome, would be an ambitious itinerary, but adding Lausanne and Naples is well beyond "too much".

I keyed in on the "three teenage children" info. I am a high school teacher and unless these are three very unusual and remarkable teenagers, there are some generalizations we can make. 1) They like to sleep in, 2) They like a pretty good pace of activities but not necessarily a lot of time in transit. 3) They will be done with museums by the second or third stop. 4) The itinerary needs to be balanced with activities as well as traditional sight seeing.

You need to plan not only with the distances involved and the transit time, but with the unique needs and interests of teenagers.

Planning a trip is not easy. For me, the logistics/itinerary is the hardest part when you consider time of transport/days, etc. But, don't get discouraged by everyone telling you it's too much. It is too much, but just rethink it and come up with a new plan.

When you are planning, think in terms of how many nights, not days. How many "nights" will you spend in each location? How many "nights" do you have on the ground? Two nights equals about 1 1/2 days of sightseeing, three nights is about 2 1/2 days of sightseeing. The bigger the group the harder it is to get everyone together and moving, so time management is even more difficult. I would suggest no less than three nights in any location, and more than that if possible.

Good planning will make an awesome trip for all of you!

I think the experienced travelers are spot on. You could easily just spend the 2 1/2 weeks in Italy and not see it all, so my suggestion, if you have not been before, is to focus on Italy. It is a magical country and 2 1/2 weeks there would be perfection! Save the other places for a different trip maybe. Rome is wonderful and Tuscany is beautiful. This will allow you time to see Naples, Pompeii (very cool) and the Amalfi Coast. We did 10 days in Italy and it was not nearly enough time! Good luck planning and have a great trip!

Your trip is way too spread out and has too many stops, with insufficient time in each.

I suggest you save London and Paris for another time. Fly straight to Venice and home from Rome. You can fit your Italy itinerary into your 2.5 weeks.

I agree with everyone else. Rather than my re-posting them, just read their posts twice!

However, if your family really does want this kind of quick "lightening strike" visit to multiple places, they can take an organized escorted tour. On a tour, you can see places quicker than on your own. Someone who knows the way (and alternatives if the planned way is not available) is taking you from your hotel to a sight to a meal to the next sight. There's no way to duplicate that pace on your own (so if that's where they're getting this itinerary, stop right now, and either book the tour, or re-do it from scratch).

I also agree with the points made above about the interests of teenagers. If they're not part of the trip planning, they'll be miserable.

Way too much travel. The places you mentioned are great, but you need more than 2 days in Lindon and more than 2-3 days in Paris. 2-3 days in Venice is fine, but 2 days in Florence is ridiculous. Also, skip the Naples part.

linda,

I'll add my voice to the chorus of many here, and agree that this Itinerary is far too ambitious for the time frame available and the distance covered. Two and a half weeks is not a long time for travel in Europe and if your family wants to enjoy the trip, I'd suggest a more realistic Itinerary. Also keep in mind that July is peak travel season in Europe and it's going to be hot and crowded. I would highly recommend that your daughter not make any hotel or flight bookings until a better Itinerary is worked out.

It would help to have some additional information......

• Has your daughter been to Europe before? If not, I would highly recommend reading Europe Through The Back Door before she gets too far in the planning, and then the country or city-specific guidebooks (RS preferred) to plan in more detail.
• Where is she flying from?
• What's the exact number of days allocated for the trip, including flight days?

It would be helpful if your daughter could provide a list of the places and sights she's most interested in seeing on this trip, ranked in order from most important to least important. That information would provide a good basis for the group here to provide suggestions for a workable Itinerary.

A few thoughts that occurred to me after reading your post.....

• With only 2.5 weeks, it would be prudent to skip Naples & Capri and focus on Rome and the north.
• There are other locations in Switzerland that would be more interesting (especially for teenagers) than Lausanne. She could also look at Lucerne or the Berner Oberland.
• I'd suggest more time for London at the beginning, as everyone may be jet lagged and two days is a very short time. They wouldn't really have time to see much.
• Plan on the basis of nights rather than days.

Good luck with the planning!

Thank you, thank you one & all for your input. I have definitely taken heed and am revamping my original itinerary. Fist change is eliminating Florence (I hate to do it), which will add more days in Paris, Venice & Rome. Only reason I'm keeping Naples is because I think it's the only way to get to Capri - a place that my 2 granddaughters are dying to see. Again, I really do appreciate your suggestions & am working on making it all better.

Fist change is eliminating Florence (I hate to do it), which will add
more days in Paris, Venice & Rome.

But you only had 2 nights/1.5 days for Florence. That only gives you one extra night for two cities, not three. And It looks like you're only allocating 1 night for Capri? It's a long way to go for just an overnight, especially from Venice: it's over 5 hours by train just to Naples. Add another hour for the ferry, plus transport time from Napoli Centrale to the port, any down time between arriving at the port and the next ferry + transition from port to hotel on the island. IMHO, that's a HUGE chunk of time spent on transport that could otherwise be spent sightseeing!

But do come back with your new itinerary - in # of nights versus days in each location - once you've gotten it all together?

lindah,

I'd like to reiterate a point I mentioned earlier.....

"It would be helpful if your daughter could provide a list of the places and sights she's most interested in seeing on this trip, ranked in order from most important to least important. That information would provide a good basis for the group here to provide suggestions for a workable Itinerary."

With such a very short time frame, efficient transportation and minimizing travel time between destinations is important. As others have mentioned, Capri is a bit of an "outlier" and it's going to add quite a bit of travel time, especially if you're travelling from Venice. If Capri is absolutely essential, the visit there will have to be at the expense of somewhere else.

Having a prioritized list would really help.....

If Capri is a MUST, then my suggestion is London-Paris ( fly to)-Venice- Naples/Sorrento so you can do Capri (and Pompeii while you are there) and Rome. Still a busy schedule, but if well planned, manageable.

Count your nights at a location for a better vision of your time allocations.

Capri is highly overrated, expensive, and crowded. I would really dissuade anyone from a one night trip there, coming all that way to be frustrated with summer crowds. Tell the kids to put it on their list for when they travel on their own time and money.

Also, think in terms of nights, not days. Days available for fun sightseeing are the time between sleeps. 3 nights in London equals two full days, for example. If they are only planning in two nights in London, they have ONE DAY as arrival day is shot. Have them lay this out in print, night-by-night and pencil in what they want to do in each place, how they will travel between places, and how much that travel costs in time and money, I suspect the budget will be blown, unless money is no object, but the transportation.

I've been to Sorrento a couple of times and even had lunch near to the ferry that leaves for Capri and I've still not been inspired to visit the island.

It's a long way to go just to be surrounded by designer shops, expensive hotels and restaurants and I can't recall hearing one good report about the Blue Grotto, every report I've read highlights how short their tour was, how crowded it was and how disappointed they were and all this at the expense of Florence!

What is it about Capri that your grandaughters are dying to see? It may be that there are other areas that could fill their desire without the logistical hassle of Capri.

Expanding on the above....

IMHO Capri is best saved for a trip with enough time for some of the rest of the Campania region, such as Pompeii, Herculaneum, Ravello/Positano, Naples, etc. We enjoyed our two nights on the island but spent most of the midday hours away from the crowded piazzas, such as hiking up to the ruins of Villa Jovis, and took advantage of early-mornings wanders, before the hordes descended, as well. Skipped the Blue Grotto: if there's an tourist-trap type attraction on Capri, that's the one.

But we also had 3 additional nights in Sorrento, and were coming from Rome (flying home from Naples) so the distance wasn't nearly as far as from Venice. With multiple transfers involved, it STILL ate a healthy 1/2 day to get there.

I think RS says somewhere: Plan to come back.

You don't need to see everything on the first trip. I would take London and Paris this time and Venice, Florence, Naples, Capri, and Rome next time. Or the opposite as you prefer.

In Linda H's other thread about London https://community.ricksteves.com/travel-forum/england/lodging-and-sightseeing-in-london

it looks like the plane and Eurostar are set in stone. I've asked for clarification.