London Museums: Can it be done?!

If you just want the highlights, I think you could visit both the British Museum and the National Gallery in one day..... Enjoy lunch at St. Martin's restaurant in the crypt ......Trafalgar Square is a place to sit and people watch on a nice day.....I haven't been to the Wallace Collection, so I can't advise on that..... I probably wouldn't combine two art museums or two history/ archeology museums in one day, however---a little variety is better.

Art is in the eye of the beholder for sure. That said what type of art are you interested in seeing? Tate Britain is home to British art from the 1500's until present. So old and new. Personally I like to always see what won the Turner Prize. The National Gallery on the other hand contains noted paintings by Surat, Monet, Rembrandt, Van Gough, Titan, etc. Both excellent galleries. I've read that tickets for Leonardo Da Vinci, Painter at The Court of Milan are on sale now. National Gallery starting Nov 9 and running through to Feb. 12, 2012. Most museums are free of charge. However, when there is a special exhibition there is a fee. Paid and saw a wonderful Miro exhibit at the Tate Modern in May. I personally find the British Museum overwhelming, much like the Louvre. You could spend a day or a few hours. All based on your interest and how crowded it is. Lastly, yes you can see Trafalgar Square, St. Martins's (are you going to the crypt for lunch?) and the National Gallery in a day. in fact you'll have time to stroll up and over to Covent Garden and then Leicester Square. Maybe even more. Very walkable city and sites are closer than you think. Have fun.

Depends on what Art you like. National gallery is convenient to Trafalgar Square and other sights; has "waterlilies" by Monet. Tate Britain has Turners and older paintings. Both have good coffee shops. I enjoyed the walk from Tate along the River, past green lawns and end up at Westminster Abbey. I use the National Gallery more as a "pop-in" and see a few of my favorites when i am in the area, whereas when i do the Tate, i plan on a longer time as it is a little way away from the sights.

It's really your taste in art. We spent several hours in the National Gallery and not much time in the Tate Modern. The art is dramatically different. For example, in the Tate Modern, we saw a pile of dirty laundry in a corner. That was somebody's art. We also saw a long large rope placed on the floor with a sign that says "do not touch". I guess if we could touch, we could be an artist. You can see that I wasn't impressed with the Tate. However, you can visit the Tate in the evening, which we did and we did have a wonderful tea in the top level restaurant. You look out on the wonderful lighted Centenial pedestrian bridge across the Thames. We did walk across and back in the late evening. Quite nice.

Tate Modern and Tate Britain are two different Museums. tate britain is still in their old site on Milbank (North side of the Thames) near Pimlico Tube station, with Turners and british artists going back a few years

The Wallace Collection is fairly small and can be done in an hour or two. I think you've got too much for one day. I'd do the Wallace and either the British Museum or the National Gallery in one day but not both.

Choose the National Gallery over Tate Britain for its wider range and better paintings. Tate Britain is also a bit out of the way. Visiting the Wallace Collection, the British Museum, and the National Gallery is more than I would do in a day. The museum shuffle wears me out - step, side-step, pause, back-step, side-step, walk, pause, turn, walk, walk, side-step. You might be able to. Trafalgar Square and St Martin-in-the-Fields can be done in very little time on your visit to the adjacent National Gallery. If you are young and fit enough to try to do it all, consider the short visit recommendations http://www.britishmuseum.org/visiting/planning_your_visit.aspx and http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/visiting/short-of-time/

National Gallery. I'd do British Museum, St. Martin's for lunch and the Square, then National Gallery.

Don't forget the National Portrait Gallery, also on Trafalgar Square. Portraits of well known British people from 16th century onwards eg Shakespeare, Jane Austen, the Royal Family past and present. As it, along with the other national collections, is free to enter you can pop in to have a look and see if it is your thing. http://www.npg.org.uk/

Yes, it depends on your taste. For me it's the National Gallery, no question. People rave about the Tate, but honestly, modern art is at best mildly interesting to me. I enjoy paintings from medieval period through impressionism - but cubism, surrealism, expressionism, pointillism, etc. are rarely any more interesting to me than the sixth grade art display at the public library. Just personal taste. In general, I plan two major sites for each day (plus keep a list of other options literally in my back pocket in case I find myself with extra time) with lunch in the middle.