First timers Travel to Europe....ADVICE needed!!

Let's start...you don't travel through Pisa to get to Florence. You reach Florence first. Next, you need to look at travel times. All of this can be done by train but you need to figure out times. Use this website for planning and remember the exact schedules are only posted 90 days out although they only change a couple of times a year usually. http://www.bahn.de/i/view/USA/en/index.shtml Let me ask you, did you take this itinerary from a tour? If you did, don't try to do your trip on the same schedule as a guided tour. Remember, they have a professional guide and driver to handle things that you will have to do on your own. It's best to add 25-50% to your travel time. (Getting to and from the train station, traveling when the train does and not when you necessarily want to, finding your hotel and checking in, etc.)

Hi Amanda, This is a busy itinerary! You could fly into Rome, travel by train to Florence, Pisa, Venice, and Lucerne. From Lucerne, train to Zurich to fly to Paris. To save money and for a more relaxed trip, I'd consider saving London for a future trip and add the nights to Paris, Rome and/or Florence. In the FAQ section of the Helpline, there are links to transportation information - train schedules, maps, and search for air transportation within Europe! You'll have a great time!

That is a reasonable itinerary if you want to see all those places and cover that much ground. Assuming you omit Pisa, most of your travel times are in the range of 1.5 to 4 hours, except for Venice to Luzern which is more like 6. From Luzern to Paris is only 4.5 hours so there is nor advantage to flying. To do that, you would train to Zürich airport ( a bit over an hour), allow time for check-in and security 1.5 to 2 hours)' fly, and then have to take transport from the airport into city center. It would take the same amount of time as the train, and would be a whole lot more hassle.

Our first trip to Europe was to Italy on a tour and it was great and covered a lot of ground, which, when we got home and thought about it, was too much ground....we never really got to stop and let it sink in where we were...but it was still great. Sorry to sound redundant here, but the best thoughts I can offer are to think about slowing down and travelling less...you seem to be centered on Italy and I would remain there with more time in each city, maybe add Milan. As for Pisa, well, it's world famous, yes, but for us it was really only worth a half hour. I would rather have had spent that half hour with more time in the Uffizi. I really think that you'll find time is a currency that you'll want to spend wisely while the clock is running. Happy Trails

"We have already mentally prepared ourselves for a rapid, fast moving trip with a lot of hours spent travelling." It's good to prepare for disasters. But if you can avoid the disaster, why not? Rome: not nearly enough time, especially considering the fact that your sightseeing on Day 1 will be compromised by getting out of the airport, to an ATM, into Rome, into your hotel room, and by what's known as "jet-lag". Rome really requires 4 nights if you hope to enjoy the place. Florence: 1 night? With a half day in Pisa on the same day? Don't bother. Paris and London are clearly shortchanged too. "The hardest part is figuring out the itinerary and how to travel between the different areas we want to visit." It's hard because you are stuffing too much into too little time. "My husband and I are planning our first trip to Europe..." First-timers typically try to do too much. Just remember - this is your FIRST trip. If this is a summer trip, then skip Italy. Too blessed hot and too crowded. And anyway, Rick advises 1st-timers to travel to those cultures and countries that are more easily adjusted to - the ones north of the Alps - and this is good advice. London: 4-5 nights; Eurostar to Paris, 4-5 nights; train to Switzerland - 3-4 nights. Besides Lucerne, I'd visit the Bernese Oberland (around Interlaken) as well - or possibly in place of Lucerne. It's more dramatic. "Also, if you can let me know the best/cheapest way to travel between our destinations..." http://www.eurostar.com/dynamic/index.jsp Advance-sale tickets for 2 from Paris to Interlaken can be had for a bit over 200 CHF. www.sbb.ch

I would agree that this is too much. I would either cut it down to Italy/Switzerland or Italy/Paris, or do London/Switzerland/Paris. Either of those will be far saner trips. And the previous poster has a good point about first-timer travel. I felt really lucky that my first "trip" to Europe was moving to SW Germany, because even though it's still 'foreign" almost everyone here speaks good English, many things are labeled in English, the culture shock is significantly less than it would have been if I'd been plopped down somewhere else. Even if you're an open minded citizen of the world, please take into account that things will go wrong, and the busier your trip is, the more something going wrong has the potential to significantly derail the whole trip, and that the greater the culture/language barrier are, the more frustrating and confusing and difficult to resolve the situation can be. Not trying to say 1st time travelers can't/shouldn't go to Italy at all, but just be prepared for frustration. Try to work frustration and hiccups into your planning, at least enough "leeway" for them to happen and mentally prepare yourself for them.

I undestand the desire to try to see the highlights of Europe on your first trip but this is really not a good way to travel this is 2 or 3 trips to Europe crammed into one with 14 days you would be much better off spending all 14 days in Italy or spending 14 days Paris/London or doing a trip to Switzerland. you must realize that every time you move locations you lose at least half a day. you will be spending most of your time at airports and train stations and very little time actually seeing and experiencing Europe. if you can narrow it down we can help you with itineraries what time of year do you plan on travelling? you shouldn't have to mentalling prepare yourself for trip because it is going to be hectic, you should be excited about savoring a country or two and experiencing Europe
just know you will we return to Europe and continue to explore it, you don't have to see it all on your first trip

Little bit too much ... What about 2-3 cities? Eg paris and couple in italy.
S

Amanda, I definitely agree with the others that this Itinerary is far too ambitious for the time you have available. While a "fast moving trip" is certainly possible, it also has to be realistic. It appears that your time frame is 14-days? Have you allowed for the two days you'll "lose" in travel days at both ends. You'll generally arrive in Europe the day after you depart. You likely won't get much touring done for the first day or two, as you'll be dealing with jet lag. Is there any way you could add a few days? As this is your first trip to Europe, I'd highly recommend reading Europe Through The Back Door as that will help with a lot of details including Itinerary planning. Also, it would likely be better to start in London or Paris and end in Rome, depending on when the trip will be taking place. I'd suggest some changes to make the trip easier to accomplish. Would something like this work: > Day 1 - Depart US > Day 2 - Arrive London - light touring > Day 3 - London > Day 4 - London > Day 5 - EuroStar to Paris - light touring > Day 6 - Paris > Day 7 - Paris > Day 8 - Train to Lucerne (Time ~4H:42M, 1 change) > Day 9 - Lucerne > Day 10 - Train to Florence (Time ~5H:47M, 1 change) > Day 11 - Florence > Day 12 - Train to Rome (Time ~1H:30M, direct) > Day 13 - Rome > Day 14 - Rome > Day 15 - Return to US With so little time, compromises will be necessary. I'd definitely skip Pisa, and unfortunately Venice is also problematic due to the short time, so I'd skip it on this trip. Plan to return and spend some time exploring Venice on a future trip. There are lots of possibilities, and this is only one suggestion. Good luck with your planning!

Amanda, My husband and I went on a similar trip three years ago and had the time of our lives. It was his first trip so I wanted to hit all the highlights. We did the trip backwards, which might be wise because, as another poster mentioned, things get more European as you head south! Our itinerary was: London: 3 nights, overnight ferry to Normandy Bayeux: 1 night Paris: 3 nights, overnight train to Florence Florence: 2 nights, we stopped in Pisa on the way to Cinque Terre Cinque Terre: 2 nights Rome: 2 nights As you see, we took advantage of overnight travel, though the ferry to Normandy I wouldn't recommend. One day in Paris we did Versailles in the day, the tower at Norte Dame in the late afternoon, the Louvre in the early evening and climbed the steps to Montmartre that night. Going to the Louvre the night it was open late gave us more hours to our sight-seeing day. I think going to Cinque Terre toward the end gave us a much needed break from museums! If you are young and able, invest in good shoes and prepare for the time of your life. We thought this was our one chance to see Europe together and we went for it.
I will say that we did return the last two years. Our subsequent trips were much slower (no more one night stays), but we have fond memories of our first trip and they aren't all of waiting at train stations! Have a great trip!

I've already posted once, but I have to say I like Ken's suggestion. Taking out Venice makes the itinerary much better. Five destinations in two weeks is not too much, in my opinion. But have you said when this trip will be? That makes a difference in things. also, you will want to be sure and avoid London around the time of the Olympics.

If it's your first time in Europe, I would do the trip in reverse. Start in London and end in Rome. It will be an easier cultural adjustment. And as you already know... too many places, not enough time, etc. Keep in mind that the first city on your itinerary (whichever way you do it) will suffer because of jetlag. You simply won't feel like doing a lot the first couple of days. You might consider skipping Lucerne and fly nonstop from Venice to Paris for $48 on Easyjet. Not only is that cheaper than any train you will find, but you will also have 2 more days for Paris or London.

hi Amanda My H and I are in the middle of plans for our first trip to Europe as well and have been planning now for months.. we are going mid may and will be there for 24 nights so we have a bit more time and even with that we are cutting things close. We did have to readjust our initial thoughts and are doing something very similar but after reading a ton of books and info online I would agree with the other posters and think Ken has a really good plan suggested.. it looks doable... you can rest on the train:) we are doing 4 nights in London 5 in Paris (2 days tennis open three days to tour so not so different from you) then we were going to shortchange Florence but after reading and talking to many it is just an incredible city so we will be there two days two days in Venice and three in Tuscany then on to Luterbrunnen Switz for 3 days 1 day in Bern (to shorten the trip back to London then back to London for night before departure home I think you may want to let go of one or two things like Pisa -all I hear is that its not all that except for the Tower:) but if you are short on time seems like more time in Florence would be better. We did not even try to include Rome... but opted for Tuscany instead as we felt we would need a break from all the running around. We are looking at the trains as a way to see the places in between and just slow down... We have decided not to try and cram everything in and just pick the highlights to be sure that we have some down time each day.. like museums in the AM and a river cruise in the PM I would be happy to share what we have discovered if it would be helpful since we are going to many of the same places... Good luck it is a lot to plan on your own and does feel overwhelming but I think in the end very worth it.
We are older and so not so sure how many more opportunities we will have to go back so the reason for our trying to get it all in:)

Thank you all so so much for the responses. You have no idea how much your advice means. After reading all of the opinons I quickly gathered that our iteneray is to ambitious. To answer a few questions we plan to go in late May/early June and will have a total of 16 days, including travel days. After taking the given advice I am now thinking that it would be best to start in London as suggested. Thoughts on this itenerary.... Day 1: Leave US Day 2: Arrive in London - light touring Day 3: London Day 4: London Day 5: Fly/train to Zurich to see Lucerne Day 6: Lucerne Day 7: Lucerne Day 8: Lucerne-overnight train to Venice Day 9: Venice Day 10: Venice-overnight to Florence Day 11: Florence Day 12: Florence-Eurostar to Pairs (overnight) Day 13: Paris Day 14: Paris Day 15: Paris
Day 16: Leave for US Once again, any thoughts are much appreciated. Also, if you think it would be easier to change the order of the places to visit please let me know.

Day 8: Lucerne-overnight train to Venice Day 10: Venice-overnight to Florence Day 12: Florence-Eurostar to Pairs (overnight) Do you know if you'll sleep on these overnight trains? Compromised sleep is never good when traveling, and it's always expensive. If you have to rely on overnight trains to make an itinerary work, you are probably cramming in too much. It's 2 hours to Florence from Venice. Overnight train?? NO. That's almost enough time for Venice but probably not for Florence. Not enough time in London. I would do Italy when you have enough time to justify traveling there and to see the other places there you want to see too. But if you simply must go there this time, then fly there directly from London. After Italy, train to Luzern and then train to Paris to break up the long train journey and avoid night trains.

Of your 3 night trains, only one exists, from Florence to Paris. Unless you mean to sit up overnight. There'd be no point to a Venice - Florence NT anyway, since the run is only 2 hours. If I were you, also, I'd want to take advantage of the Eurostar (the London-Paris train), a big time saver and very convenient. So maybe start London > Paris. After that if you really want to visit Lucern it's 5 hours by train from Paris, otherwise you can fly or take the train to Venice or Florence and work your way down to Rome. I think you've got too much going on in too short a time and would have a better trip if you spent more time in these places, or in fewer of them. Can you get another week? That would be more doable, and you would never regret it. Otherwise maybe be honest with yourselves about priorities and leave something for next time.

it's still too much in my opinion not enough time in London definitely not enough time in Venice or Florence I would want more time in Paris too as other's have stated train from Venice to Florence only takes 2 hours After college I backpacked through Europe and I took the night trains to save money and I found I never could sleep well and now I would never choose to take them though I do love to travel by train when possible I would spend the whole time in Italy
or I would spend 1/2 London, 1/2 Paris with short day trips from both

Note that Amanda has a revised itinerary on a separate thread. Post comments there, since this one no longer is under consideration.

I would spend the whole time in Italy. On our first trip to Italy, we spent the entire 10 days in Rome and needed to go back again. In Italy they have a saying: Roma, non basta una vita - for Rome, one lifetime is not enough.

Actually Lola it is cut-and-paste identical to her revised itinerary in that thread, to which people there have offered specific comments.