Are you seriously wanting to travel that hard--six countries in 3 weeks? That's 3 and a half days per country and you'll not have time to see much. Remember you've got to build in travel/transfer time into that itinerary.

Cut it down to a week per country and if you're in the UK to meet, then Spain and Italy are the two I'd choose to add on.

With three weeks I would pick 5-6 locations (not countries) and enjoy those places. The more places you add the more money and time is eaten up in travel - count on losing at least 1/2 day each time you move due to time checking out, getting to rail stations or airports, finding the train, waiting, travel, getting to hotel, checking etc.

Cities like London, Paris, Rome I would allocate more time to because there is so much to see. Sit down with a guide book on these countries and narrow down what you want to see and then determine what you have time to. First timers usually underestimate how much time and money it takes to move around.

Also, it probably will make sense to fly into one city and out of another - for example fly into London (its english speaking and could be more comfy to start in) and then fly out of Rome to avoid backtracking to London at the end.

I hope this helps - have fun planning!

Can you say why you've picked those countries & anything in particular you want to see or do there? That way we can help you reduce it, because as has been said you will see nothing trying to cover so much in 3 weeks.
What's important to you? Cities, culture, history, scenery, beaches, shopping etc? That is what will define the best options for you, rather than just getting other people's suggestions & preferences.

As everyone has said - you need to do fewer countries. You don't want to be moving every 2-3 days for that length of time.

Some cities you stay in (Rome, Paris, London, etc) need at least 4-5 days alone to properly appreciate them.

I'm planning four weeks next year and even three countries is a squeeze in that time (Italy, Spain, France).

Thank you everyone for your replies!

The reason we chose these 6 places are because we are interested in art, history, scenery, culture and cities and have researched and heard from others that all of these are rich in those things.

We plan on going to these places if possible:

England- London, Oxford,
Spain- Barcelona,
France- Paris,
Italy- Rome, Venice and possibly Florence and Tuscany
Czech- Prague and
Greece- Santorini, Athens

Do you think this is too much? Which ones would you cross out from these cities if it's too rushed?

Thanks again for all you guys' help and feedback! I really appreciate it!

Looking at a map, Prague is really the outlyer and I would drop it - and I would probably also drop either Greece or Barcelona.

I would do teh following (do your 21 days include travel to and from Europe - if not, then you have 19 days on the ground...)

This is what I would do (and you will see how fast 21 days gets eaten up):

Fly into London - spend 5 nights/4 days, including a day trip to Oxford
Take the Eurostar to Paris www.eurostar.com booking as far in advance as possible to get the best price - spend 5 nights/4 days
Fly to Venice using www.easyjet.com - spend 3 nights/2 days
Train to Florence - spend 3 nights/2 days with day trip by bus to Siena, or day trip to Pisa/Lucca using the trains
Train to Rome - spend 4 nights/3 days
Fly home from Rome

That is a 20 night itinerary - again keep in mind you will lose 1/2 a day in transit each time you move so I have put the full day count you will get in each place.

Since you and your sister are in your early 20s, you have years of travel ahead of you, so don't be tempted to squeeze too much into this trip. While jamikins writes "you will lose 1/2 a day in transit each time you move", I would say more like a full day, so keeping the number of destinations down will actually give you more sightseeing time. One week each in England, France, and Italy would be about right, IMO. Leave yourself some relaxation time. Walking through a park in London, having a long lunch in Paris, or sitting over a cappuccino at a cafe in Rome can be just as much fun as sightseeing.

So, I talked to my sister and we took out Spain.

This is what we have atm:
England, Czech, Greece, Italy and France

Is there another order that would be better for traveling geographically?
We're thinking of flying to all except from Italy to Paris.

In what order would you guys recommend?
We can't fly out of Greece nor Prague since both pass through Russia or Qatar and we don't want to have to get the visas.

We both have been wanting to go to Greece and Prague so we're trying really hard to visit those countries.

You still have 5 countries, which you simply cannot do reasonably in 21 days and have time to see what you want to see. You will spend too much time in transit, and not enough time seeing the places you visit.

I would still recommend paring it down to 5 LOCATIONS. While you can do say 2 nights in Prague, you would spend about 1 whole day traveling to and from, plus spend lots on transit costs. If you are flying remember to count the costs of getting to and from the airports and the time you need to sit at the airport prior to your flights, plus the time waiting for your luggage. All that for 1 day of sight seeing really isnt what I would call good use of vacation time or money.

Rememeber, Europe will still be here for a return trip!

Chita, you are asking questions but not listening to the answers . The places you are talking about are mainly at least 1500 years old. In certain cases are pretty big and actually have a fair density of great stuff and people in them to look at. Just surf on London on this site and the number of places to look at "art, history, scenery, culture" are enormous. There is a pretty fair theatre scene in London, a good number of palaces and castles, way too many museums (mainly free) and an extremely vibrant art scene. To many Europeans London is relativly new (founded around -50bc) and if you get to Italy you will find the modern art museum starts around 1450 (that being when they think the modern era started!) so basically, and I admire your choice of cities, there is half a year of holiday in

England (London and Oxford),
Czech (Prague, Ive spent 2 weeks here and not scratched the surface),
Greece (Santorini, Athens, oh my so much to do),
Italy(Rome, Venice and possibly Florence (a week in itself just to come to grips with this) and Tuscany (do you know how many cities) where I've already spent 6 weeks of my life without passing through the same place twice yet bearing in mind that before the Romans got there there were Etruscans) and
France (Paris which can take up a fair bit of life to understand).

So, you can just decide to not listen (and you will still have a great holiday) or I suggest go have another chat with your sister and drop out something else

Listen to everyone - Sit down and decide which 5 or 6 cities you REALLY want to see. (7 if you count Oxford and London as two instead of just a day trip from London).

Even that will be pretty rushed when you subtract all the travel time.

Places like Paris and Rome, and especially London are HUGE and you need more than 3 or 4 days to see much. Plus you have to account for jet lag which may knock you down fora day or two at the beginning. Then account for any day trips you might want - like Oxford, Windsor, Versailles, Pompeii, etc. All of those eat up even more time.

Transportation suggestions?>

Trains are in many ways the best way IMO to get around Europe and since you are traveling widely strongly look at some kind of Eurail Youthpass - youthpasses are only for folks under 26 as you both seem to be from your OP.

Youthpasses IMO are great bargains - fantastic sites IMO for planning a European rail/railpass trip - www.budgeteuropetravel.com; www.ricksteves.com and www.seat61.com.

I did one of those "If it's Tuesday, it must be Paris" trips in my 20's. Really don't remember much, except what the back of seats on the bus looked like and how I desperately wanted to do laundry!

I understand your eagerness to see everything on your first trip but for your own enjoyment, AND sanity, try to narrow it down.

It sounds like you need to start with a map. Circle the cities you want to visit and then take a look at the distances between them.

What time of year are you going to travel? Prague in winter - brrr and shorter days. Cities in Greece, Italy, France in August? Heat can be a killer.

I've been to Rome 3 times now and still haven't made it to the Appian Way. It was on my 'must see' list but I always got caught up in other parts of the city and ran out of time. It'll still be there when I do finally get to visit it.

So start with a map, a time of year and a budget. Then pick 5 major cities at most and look at the logistics of traveling between them, trying not to circle around and backtrack.

Good input above---ditto last paragraph.

I do believe these sisters have looked at map. They are planning to fly between many of these places. I would relax about not having seen the Appian Way. Many people take delightful multi-country trips to Europe that include Italy, and didn't see the Appian Way. I wouldn't throw a whole plan out the window because of that.


chitatravels,

If you can fly into Greece first and work your way backward, that might be better. Sort of depends on which time of year you are going.

If you need to start in London, you might find that your best best for cheap flights would be to fly to Prague after London, then fly from Prague to Paris, then train to Venice-Florence-Rome, the a flight to Athens (go directly to Santorini, then see Athens city when you return to fly out).

But you are the one who is going to have to look up those flights and do the logistics. As you can see, 9 out of 10 people here are opposed to your trip, so they are not going to help you. There is a website called FlyerTalk that has message forums, and people there can give you some pointers about how to look for cheap flights and what might be the best order for your trip.


You can visit Florence en route from Venice to Rome (or vice versa), so you don't need a night there.

"so they are not going to help you. " a little presumptive perhaps.

>Biztravfod - "Many people take delightful multi-country trips to Europe that include Italy, and didn't see the Appian Way. I wouldn't throw a whole plan out the window because of that."

What???
That was my comment not the OP's and I never said anything about throwing out a plan. Simply giving my opinion on how the best laid plans can change.

The questions asked were if anyone had any advice, help, suggestions. I think that is all any of us is offering. Well, most of us. You seem to be the only one telling them to go to another site as they wont get any help here.
Constructive critism of their itinerary is being offered and they can choose to take it or not.

Biztravfod - it is ridiculous to say I am against their trip and that I won't help. When someone comes with no real plan and wants advice I will happily give it. Will I say that it's smart to see everywhere in Europe in two weeks no, but I will do my best to try to help them have a great time. It's a free message board and most people give their free advice in order to make others trips better...at least I do. Your opinion is yours, and is no more valid than anyone elses.

bilboburgler, hollywoodsc and jamikins: Ignore it. Biztravfod joined yesterday and wants us all to know she is the expert on absolutely everything. Nearly 100 posts and climbing. Anyone who offers helpful/contrary advice is insulted. She took StCirq to task for her wonderful 'non' trip report.

She even insulted Fodors monitors for moving a thread into the Lounge.

Gee, could it be our many-recent-screen-names member?

Can you believe the multiple Forum personalities but all with the same contrary know-it-all attitide.
It really is sad.

I agree with the posts who suggest that you are trying to see too much. I've always like Rick Steves' idea that you should assume you'll be back.

I would suggest that you pare your itinerary down so that you see fewer countries, but more within the countries you do see.

I know that my circumstances are different from yours, but I tend to visit a single country per year for three weeks.

I always have guide books to help in my planning.

A good map is the first thing you need (and understand the scale of the map; many people don't have a clue about scale). A good guidebook or two or three or four is the next step. Cut your destinations down to the minimum number of destinations that you can live with. You won't experience much if you're on trains or airplanes most of the time, except airports and train stations, and while they can be fun just because you're in a foreign place, they aren't what you spent all that money to get to Europe to see.

Ignore everthing biztravefod has to say. She's some bitter rekinvented Fodorite who has nothing valuable or useful to add.

I really suggest to utilise the train as much as possible. Eurostar is great, for example. Planes/flying is a damn pain and really only worth it for medium --> long distance travel.

Plus, you're still doing too many countries. I did 3 weeks last year (Italy, France, UK (London) + The Netherlands (Amsterdam)), and this year we're doing 4 weeks in 2 or 3 countries. We learned our lesson (although we enjoyed it, less is more).

Really look at Jamikins' plan. It is just about perfect - time wise. Plus, it does a lot of what you said you wanted.

It gives you three of the world's great cities: London, Paris, Rome plus Venice and Florence.

It gives you a sampling of three quite different cultures, foods, etc.

It gives you some countryside and scenery - Tuscany.

Art - on a big scale: the Louvre, the Uffizi, the Sistine Chapel, etc. Speaking of Art, since you put it in as a choice, don't just spend a day in Florence. It is an art lovers dream city. If you do go to Paris, try to include Versailles.

It also gives you some great architecture.

From London, there is also Bath - lovely city for historians and Jane Austen Fans.

If Greece, however, is your dream, then do Greece in place of Italy (or Paris or London). Athens will be your big city (with museums and world class archeology sites) and the islands will be your scenery/countryside.

We all have trouble making choices for trips. You just have to so you are seeing and doing the most with your time and for the money spent, rather than spending a lot of money and time getting from place to place without seeing/experiencing much.

If you are planning to fly between cities, you might want to plan your trip by looking at the days flights are available and the departure times between destinations. DH and I visited London, Prague, Budapest, Berlin and Paris in 18 days. We used Easyjet to fly between all of the cities except Prague and Budapest and in that case we took a bus to Cesky Krumlov one day, then a shuttle to Linz and train to Budapest the next. On our travel days we booked early flights and arrived in the early afternoon, had time to check into our hotels and spend the afternoon on a guided bus tour or self-guided walking tour. Don't be discouraged by people who want you to stay longer and visit just a few locations, lots of us have done a whirlwind tour and survived!!!

Business must not be very good if biztravfod has time to write all those posts! Just saying...