marissakayv

Hi travel friends,

My husband and I are finally planning a trip to Europe. Neither of us has ever been. We are looking at 2-3 weeks in April /May. Scotland is very high on our list. I was just hoping you can help shape our itinerary and provide general tips for planning. We are big fans of beer, hiking /nature, and are seeking a good mix of picturesque smaller towns and cities.

Was thinking about Scotland (Edinburgh, Oban with day trips to Glencoe and other highland areas), Germany (Munich, Bavaria), and northern Italy (Genoa, Portofino, and suggestions for a northern lake town?).

I have also considered Denmark, Netherlands, Switzerland, or Austria instead of Italy. Thoughts? Too ambitious for 16-21 days? Other suggestions? If I have to make a shorter trip, what should I prioritize? As a first time traveler, any help is greatly appreciated!

Edward2005

Italy would be an excellent choice for April and May because the climate is more pleasant there than in northern Europe that time of year. You can still get snow in the alps in April and May!

My quick tips:
1 - fly into one city and home from another. this avoids wasting time and money back-tracking. So-called great round-trip fares into and out of the same city are often false savings because you you waste time and money back-tracking.

2 - plan on a minimum of 3 nights per city. Less than that and you will spend an inordinate amount of time in transit and you won't get as much out of the places you visit.

3 - For an April or May trip, start your trip in Italy and then work your way north. This lets you avoid Italy's heat and gives you the best chance of pleasant weather in the north.

4 - pack light!

Jean

You need to know exactly how long this trip will be before you can figure out what you can do. There's a big difference between 16 days and 21 days.

I would only consider three countries if you truly have 3 full weeks. A "good mix of picturesque small towns and cities" takes time, and time is lost (a half day or more) moving from one country to another.

Check your flight and train options. When looking at flights note the luggage restrictions of the budget airlines and which airports they use which are often not well served by public transportation (and thus add cost and time to the logistics).

Since your thinking is still a bit all over the continent (7 countries mentioned), you should do some research and thinking about what sort of trip you want, how much time you want to spend traveling between points, etc.

janisj

To visit Oban, Edinburgh, glencoe and anywhere else in Scotland you will need at least a week there. May I ask, why Oban specifically? Do you have family connections, or is as a jumping off point for Mull and Iona? Because, Oban itself is fine, there are many more scenic spots in Scotland.

After Scotland, are you at all interested in any parts of England and/or London?

The very first thing you need to do is nail down exactly how many days you have in total . . . You lose 1.5 days just traveling to/from Europe and another half day minimum every time you move from city to city. So if you only have say 14 days, that nets you 11.5 days on the ground. If you want 6 or 7 days in Scotland you'd really only have time for one or at VERY most two other cities.

If you can add a third week . . . You can add another one or two places.

PalenQ

Trains are great for Germany and Italy - maybe not Scotland depending on where you go - for lots about trains in general check www.seat61.com; www.budgeteuropetravel.com and www.ricksteves.com.

Fly from Scotland to Munich - spend 3-4 days there and take train to Italy via Austria (there are overnight trains too) - hit one of the Italian lakes like Lake Como and wind your way down to Genoa and Portofino - fly home from Milan (or Rome if you wish to end there).

janisj

oops -- that should say >> You lose <B>2</B>.5 days just traveling to/from Europe and another half day . . .<<

marissakayv

Thanks so much for your quick replies! We definitely have plans to fly open jaw. Luckily, we are in Atlanta with many direct and somewhat affordable flight options. I should have prefaced with this is very early planning stage. I definitely only plan to do 3 countries with 3 weeks- which is our goal.

@janisj Other than being a good springboard, no real reason for Oban. If you have any suggestions, I would love to hear them!

@PalenQ that's a fantastic itinerary suggestion - Thank you! Will keep that in mind.

Once I've had some time to look into this a little further, I'll get back to you.

bilboburgler

You could really do with a look at say Rough Guide to Europe becuase you have not made many choices yet

Scotland Edinburgh and the Highlands
Bavaria
Liguria and a northern lake
Denmark
Netherlands
Switzerland
Austria

I make that around 90 days of travel just to get an overview.

So, you need to get a handle on Jet2.com, Ryanair, easyJet, Wings etc as the cheapo airlines, use rome2rio or skyscanner to get a links A to B,

"we are big fans of beer, hiking /nature, and are seeking a good mix of picturesque smaller towns and cities. " no reason you cannot do all of that in any of these places

Going to need some more help....

janisj

>>@janisj Other than being a good springboard, no real reason for Oban. If you have any suggestions, I would love to hear them!<<

Hundreds (not really an exaggeration). You could spend your entire three weeks in Scotland and just about scratch the surface.

And three weeks / three countries would be similar to one week for New England, one week for New/York/Washington DC/ Charleston, and one week for California. It would give you a taste but you'd REALLY have to be selective where you went.

Soooo what to do -- Get some guide books. You need to winnow down from your current laundry list.

Then after you have an idea of the two or three countries that interest you most, we can help you work out a reasonable itinerary.

dwdvagamundo

Marissa--hi, fellow Atlantan!

Janis said: You could spend your entire three weeks in Scotland and just about scratch the surface.

I was going to suggest that you spend your vacation in Scotland.

Keep in mind that Europe is much "denser" with things to see and do than the US, which means that to be able to see and appreciate where you are, you must slow down.

My spouse and I are planning a month in the UK this fall, with two weeks in Scotland (our second visit) and two weeks in England (our third). We are NOT what is called "slow travelers". We plan to return to only four places we've been before, with there of those solely to see things we failed to see when we were there before, and the fourth being London.

In addition to Edinburgh, Glencoe and Oban, take a look at the Scottish Borders, which is very different and also very charming, and even Northumbria in England. We've grown to love Northern England.

Have a great trip!

dwdvagamundo

Oops--"three of those".

I should also have said that to those of us with Scottish and English heritage, the UK is even "denser" than most of Europe, because of all the cultural affinities.

Dogeared

April is statistically the driest month in Scotland.

The two commonest mistakes that tourists make are packing too much and trying to cover too much in too little time.

The more you move, the more time you waste doing so. In travel as in many things, 'less is more'. The less you move, the more time you spend IN places seeing/doing things.

While good hiking can be found in many places, in my opinion based on 50+ years of hiking all over the world, THE best place for hiking is Switzerland. If you really are a 'hiker' rather than just a short stroll on flat land walker, you may want to think about that.

I never find it difficult to determine where to go on a trip. That's because I always have a 'theme' that helps me choose. A lot of tourists want to 'go to Europe' and that is about as far as their thinking takes them. Compare that with someone who decides they are going on a 'hiking vacation' or a 'Picasso vacation' for example. Having a 'theme', it becomes much easier to then narrow things down.

If I decided I wanted to hike in April for example, even though I consider Switzerland the best for hiking, there is likely to still be too much snow in April. May is doable just but I would not go in April to hike in Switzerland.

Scotland on the other hand has little chance if any of snow in the lowlands and so I might decide to spend a week hiking the Fife Coastal Path. It's a good time of year for that and a good route to choose since it follows the coast from town to town and if it starts pouring rain, you can stop somewhere for a warm drink and wait to see if the rain stops or hop on a bus to take you back to where you are staying.
http://www.fifecoastalpath.co.uk/

If I wanted to do a 'Picasso vacation', then I would start perhaps with a site like: https://theculturetrip.com/europe/sp...-view-his-art/

Coming up with a focus for a trip makes it a lot easier. Some people seem to focus on 'ticking the places that I have heard others talk about, off a list.' That really isn't a focus is it. So they end up with, 'I've heard of 50 places people visit and can't decide which to visit in the time I have available.' Then they wonder why they can't decide. LOL

PalenQ

My husband and I are finally planning a trip to Europe. Neither of us has ever been.>

I think 2-3 weeks in Scotland may be overkill for many and if never been to Europe before try to at least split time there and in one country on the Continent - weather in Scotland at that time can also be dicey cool- fly open jaw - into say Edinburgh and fly to say Rome or Venice and fly home from Italy. Rome would be one place that any novice traveler will revel it.

Dogeared

I don't know how you can state, "Rome would be one place that any novice traveller will revel in.", PalenQ. That is an assumption.

I always remember being in Rome once and hearing a guy standing outside the Colosseum and saying something like, 'it's a ruin, a pile of old rocks. I don't see what there is to get excited about.' Obviously, Rome was not a place that guy 'reveled in'.

Nowhere is a place that ANY novice traveller would revel in. It has to be of interest to the person, not you or I.

I do agree that for a first trip, trying to achieve a balance of places is difficult if you look at a list of 50 places you think would interest you and then try to cut that down to 2 or 3. That's why I suggest having a theme that helps you narrow down your choices. Rome or anywhere else, may or may not fit into that theme.

I also agree that 2-3 weeks in Scotland may be overkill for many. But I have no idea whether it would be overkill for the OP or not. That depends on the OP's interests, not anyone else's. I think we need to be careful not to assume what someone else would prefer.


I think the OP needs to decide what they want to do on their trip FIRST and then suggestions as to where they can do it can follow.

"We are big fans of beer, hiking /nature, and are seeking a good mix of picturesque smaller towns and cities.", does not provide any criteria on which to narrow things down by much. The April/May timing helps a bit. So the criteria needs more definition.

PalenQ

I don't know how you can state, "Rome would be one place that any novice traveller will revel in.", PalenQ. That is an assumption.>

OK

"Rome would be one place that most novice travellers will revel in.", PalenQ. Why -because they've perhaps been dreaming of seeing such famous places like Colosseum, Roman Forum and Vatican" - but of course dogears is right not everyone will like it.

StCirq

I hated Rome the first three times I visited it. But it was MY own limitations that made me feel that way - traveling with infants, then toddlers, then young kids, in July and August when it was unbearably hot. It was my own bad choices that made it an unpleasant venue for me. Since then I've loved it, but know its limitations, and my own.