Hi,
My husband and I are trying to weigh the benefits of making a pit stop in Venice. We are planning on flying from Prague to either Venice or Rome. We would only be able to stay a night in Venice. The flight would get in at 5pm into Venice and we would leave on the train to Rome at 1:30pm the next day. We would then have 2.5 days in Rome before traveling up to Florence. Our other option is to skip Venice and fly into Rome a day earlier than planned around 2:30pm. Is Venice a place to see or something to skip in our time frame?
You won't have any time to see Venice so I would say to skip it. If your plane lands at 5 you won't get into the city and hotel before 6. That might give you 3 hours to see the city. In the morning you might have an hour or two before you must check out of your hotel and make your way to the train station. All in all I think it would be a waste of time. Save it for your next trip when you can really enjoy it. donna
Thanks so much! That was my gut feeling, but I just wanted it to be confirmed! I appreciate your opinion.
I agree with Donna. Traveling on water takes a little more time than you might expect, unless you use higher-priced transportation, and under the best circumstances you'll only have a few hours to enjoy the city. Some might say that's better than nothing, but you and Venice deserve more of each other.
Save Venice for another trip and give it plenty of time. Also, you will then be travelling down to Rome and then back up to Florence a few days later. That is double train time as you will maybe go through Florence to get to Rome
If you have the option, I'd fly from Prague to Florence since it's on the way, visit Florence, and then continue on to Rome by train. Although some airlines will try to book Florence destination flights into the Pisa area airport, I've had no problems booking international flights into Florence directly. Also, it's a small, pleasant airport, so you spend less time dealing with airport "stuff" (vs flying into Rome).