moebraze

Hello all,

This is my first time on this forum, but from what I gather, it's a great place to start research on all things travel. I hope to gather as much information as possible before we embark on our journey. Thanks in advance for the help! 

My wife and I are looking in to our first European trip! We are in the planning phase of the process and will most likely purchase our plane tickets in the next 3-6 months with an arrival date between August-October of 2016. So, lots of time to plan a route and listen to all of the expert travelers in this forum for advice. 

Here's a few things to consider before giving any advice:

- Independent travel is what we are leaning towards. 
- Timing: 16 days (may push it to 17/18) depends on work schedules
- Would like to Fly into Amsterdam or depart from Amsterdam (no reason at all, just thought it would be fun to see it). 
- Would like to see 3-5 cities if that is possible (I understand 16 days means around 14 days on the ground). 
- Would like to travel by train to save on money
- We'll be utilizing AirBnb for the most part
- We love food, history and culture
- Both are first timers in Europe, so we figure a "beginners" route in Europe would be our best introduction to travel.
- We are flying from the West Coast of the United States

I hope I didn't miss anything to help with the advice, but ANY advice would be much appreciated.

Thanks

justineparis

Hello.. so fun planning.. but its a bit like a buffet.. our eyes can be bigger then our stomaches... in other words.. don't pig out..lol..I think with basically only two weeks on the ground visiting three major cites is enough.. travel takes time.. checking out.. getting to train stations, the commute.. then finding next hotel ( or apartment) etc. even for cities that are not too far apart it can be minimally 1/2 day .. and you have a few places that are not that close together on your wish list!!

Ideally look into open jaw or multiple destination airfares..fly into one place and out of another( not two one ways!) , so you can travel in a line and not waste time backtracking, not just time, but money..

I would start north ( ie Amsterdam, which can be cool and rainy in October.. ) and then work south( which can be too warm in August..) ideally September is a good month to split the difference.

Train tickets are great way to get around.. but obviously you may need to get some cheap flights.. ie Amsterdam to Rome , Rome to Dublin, Dublin to London.. etc. Easyjet and Vueling are pretty decent( these are short flights but long train rides in some cases)

If interested in PAris ( and who wouldn't be.. ) then taking the Eurostar to and from London.. or the Thaly train between it and Amsterdam.. book well in advance to get cheapest fares. Both those trips are short.. 2.5 Paris-London, or Amsterdam - PAris about 3 hours.

Tony2phones

Fance/Paris would probably be easier than Italy, as said links to London and Amsterdam by train

US~Dublin~London (Ryanair/Aerlingus/Cityjet)~Paris(rail)~ Amstrdam (rail)~US

Early September is a good time to Travel, August is peak season and October is getting towards Winter

IMDonehere

Fly into one place, fly out from another

Too many places for a trip. You lose at least 1/2 day moving from city to city. Besides the actual travel time is packing, unpacking, checking in and out, transportation to and from hotel and if you take a plane, all the extra time that entails.

Best time to travel is September, some of the crowds are gone and the weather is usually good. We usually travel to Europe between May 15 and June 15 or Sept 15-Oct 15

As noted above there are cheap but reliable inter-Europe carriers, but they enforce their weight restrictions

bilboburgler

August is still the main holiday season so I'd avoid. September can be busy with kids goiing back to school and people without kids getting off for a holiday but should be fine.

Amsterdam is a good way to approach Europe Lite, nearly everyone you meet will speak pretty good English, they drive on the same side of the road as you do and yet you gt more bicycles and waterways so the place is "odd". Using local trains/trams/buses you can easily find lots of places to visit for 5 6 days.

With Schipol in the mix, you can really go anywhere, I'd probably fly to Ireland or the UK (which are even more Europe lite, but the cars are on the wrong side), probably not both, before the weather turns bad. Ireland can be done by public transport but you will be constrained while the UK offers you more and the trains are affective and various Apps let you link up with buses etc. Cheepo airlines allow for easy access to both capitals, but don't just think of London, Edinburgh is pretty nice too.

After that I'd fly to Italy and for me it has to be Siena/Florence. But for others Venice is special as is Rome (a bit big for me). In any of these cities you will find loads of services in English getting between these three main sites is doable by train though time might make that a limitation. If you do end up in Venice then splurge on the room a bit.

Now, homework, get the Roughh Guide for each country and read....

bilboburgler

Of course you might prefer to use your first visit to meet loads of people, so why not book in for cooking courses or art courses. In which case you would do better in Italy to go to some of the smaller cities, where rooms will be cheaper and courses will be cheaper and yet you will find the real Italy. Look at Bologna, Ferrara, Modena, Lecce (in the south) for some ideas. One thing you will find is that Italians know how to have a good time, chaos may ensue but you will be laughing about it for years.

Edward2005

Get Rick Steves' book Europe through the Back Door. It has loads of good advice for independent travel and is aimed at new travelers. A lot of basic how-to stuff.

Gretchen

I think to begin with, Ireland is the outlier so I would drop it.
And certainly Paris would be a consideration (for me!!). Open jaw is good.

AlessandraZoe

Yep, even without reading the above, my first thoughts were..
--"Book Open Jaw"
--# of major cities in your timeframe: 3 max. Two would give your a GREAT va-cay
--Trains can eat your va-cay time and money. Choose the SHORTEST distances possible and do not even think about passes.

OK--moving forward...

If you can get the most direct flight possible to Amsterdam, that would be ideal. The people in Amsterdam not only speak English, I swear they speak American English. And since I come from a family of swimmers, I swore they were our peeps on the swim team, too.

Plus even grandmas drink mugs of beer there, which I totally admire.

Anyway...

If you are in to art, Amsterdam is a fab home not only for its own museums, but also for daytrips to places like Den Hague (The Mauritius is up there on our all-time best list).

If you are into "local" culture, Amsterdam is a great place to hang. Great vibe, great local transport, etc.

Moving south from Amsterdam, Paris is indeed a no-brainer via train. If you want to stop in Brussels on your way and then use it as a sort of daytrip area for a bit, that works. We stationed ourselves there one trip just to do art in Antwerp, Brugges, etc and were quite happy.

Paris would have been enough as your sole destination. I'd suggest "moving in" to a neighborhood and every day alternate sightseeing and just hanging.

If you DO have to go elsewhere, then take a cheapie Europe flight---does not matter where--because THAT will be your flight home.

Again, two cities ARE enough. Amsterdam and Paris are pretty darn good. If you have to add a third, choose something you both want really badly--and then research a back-up for the cheapest fare home!

Love your style,
AZ

moebraze

Thank you AlessandraZoe. We were orginally thinking, Fly into Dublin,fly to London,train to Amsterdan and train to Paris, but given most everyone's advice, we may have to scale this down to fly into London train to Amsterdam and train to Paris? Hopefully this is enough time.

Given the advice so far, I'm leaning towards a September 2016 trip to Europe!

Thanks for the advice from everyone really appreciate it and very helpful!

menachem

Amsterdam - London - Paris would work too. For instance by taking the Hook to Harwich ferry. You leave in the early evening by train, spend a night on board (very comfortable accommodation, tax free booze, loads of families by car who need to be in Essex plus truck drivers) and arrive at Liverpool St Station in London at about 9. London to Paris by Eurostar, Paris to Schiphol by Thalys, or fly out from Paris.

menachem

You can also do Harwich to Hook by train - ferry. Much more relaxing than Eurostar.

PalenQ

for folks planing a European rail trip to learn the ropes I always spotlight these info-laden sites as great surces: www.budgeteuropetravel.com - download their free online European Planning & Rail Guide which has lots of suggested rail itineraries; www.ricksteves.com and www.seat61.com - whose main focus is discounted tickets from online sources.

If wanting full flexibility to hop any train anytime in most (but not all) countries check out some kind of railpass - full-fare fully flexible tickets can cost a ton - discounted tickets for your time frame would be the cheapest way to go but then you must book them weeks in advance as they are sold in limited numbers on each train and then usually cannot be changed nor refunded - many are fine with that but if wanting flexibility and taking several trains check out various railpasses - one-country ones; 2-country ones and more-country ones.

dwdvagamundo

I like your approach too.

Don't know about Rick Steves guide (looked at one of his last nite for France, Belgium and Netherlands and was not impressed, to say the least), but do get a good travel guide or three to read about the places that would interest you and your wife. Lonely Planet, Rough Guide and Fodor's are all good. I've been using Fodor's forever, as it gives suggested itineraries and the highlights of each country/city. Don't use it for food or lodging, as it tends to have fairly expensive recommendations.

You'll find plenty of food, history and culture anywhere--or at least plenty of history and culture as food can be hit or miss in some parts of Europe.

If I were a first timer, I'd drop Amsterdam. My spouse and I have been travelling to Europe for over thirty years and we are going to Amsterdam for the first time this fall, so I don't regard it as a "beginner's" destination. Drop Ireland, too, unless you are Irish or Scots-Irish. And, as indicated in the prior threads, add France to your "wish list."


If you want a place that has good food (guaranteed), lots of history, and is the mother of European culture--art, architecture, music--- spend your entire vacation in Italy. Where depends on what appeals to you after doing some research. Or split it between northern Italy and Provence, which also has all three.


I'd also think about visiting outside the major cities as you'd miss at least half the charm of Europe.

IMDonehere

I do not want to start a Rick Steves screed, but is sorely lacking in many areas.

For sights in towns of all sizes-none better than Michelin Green

Frommer's/Fodors-good for hotels and restaurants, getting better on history/culture, small towns non-existent, lacks spark in the writing

Rough guides/Loney Planet-Edgy and for younger tarvelers, limited choices on hotels and restuarants

Eyewitness-fun to look at, little else.

menachem

why is Amsterdam not a "beginner's destination" whatever that may be. Because you only get there this year, dwdvagamundo ?

I beg to differ: Schiphol is near as a major air hub, the city is compact, easily walkable, has great public transport. Also it's very international, English is not a problem and it's a nice and laid back city to be in, culturally. London and Paris are much more forbidding. Amsterdam is village-sized with a metropolis attitude.

Italy is a much more advanced destination than Amsterdam imo.

menachem

spotted by locals is a pretty good guide to european destinations

http://www.spottedbylocals.com/amsterdam/

janisj

While the train or ferry between Amsterdam/the Netherlands and London are easy enough, this is one instance where I'd fly. Schiphol is very close to central Amsterdam and depending on which airline you choose you can fly into several London airports -- all of which are w/i easy public transport of central London.

I'd do something like fly into Amsterdam > fly to London > train to Paris > Fly home. Or Fly into London > train to Paris > train to A'dam > fly home

menachem

I started using Hook - Harwich quite a lot and it's like a mini cruise to break up the tedium of airports. Although, in 2016, there will be a direct connection from London to Rotterdam and Amsterdam by Eurostar: 4h 40m.

If you want to avoid Heathrow, fly London City - Amsterdam Schiphol.

Mimar

What janis said (as I was typing): fly into London, take the Eurostar train to Paris, and a train to Amsterdam, fly home. Or vice versa: into Amsterdam, train to Paris, Eurostar to London. Either Amsterdam or London make a good intro to Europe.

You might decide according to the best flights from your home airport. BTW, coming from the West Coast, a time change of 9 hours from continental Europe, allow for an extra day or two at your arrival city to get over jet lag. (That means falling asleep at 8 PM -- if you last that long -- and waking up at 3 AM, wide awake.)

The Eurostar between London and Paris takes only 2.5 hours city center to city center, much quicker and more comfortable than flying. You can also take the Eurostar from London to Brussels and change to another train for Amsterdam.

You can save a lot on train tickets if you buy them early. Especially the Eurostar.

In defense of Rick Steves, his introductory book, Europe Through the Back Door, helps the newbie Europe traveler feel more comfortable. RS is especially good at nitty gritty details, like the location of laundromats. And at train information. However, I'm not a fan of his hotel and restaurant recommendations.