Steve

This is our first time to Continental Europe and we have less than 3 weeks on the continent! We want to see the high points and then relax on a beech for a few days. <BR> <BR>Here is our current plan: <BR> <BR>Paris: 2 days (3 nights) <BR>Ansterdam: 1 Day (1 night) <BR>Ansterdam - Bern: Over night Train <BR>Bern: 2 days (3nights) Florence: 2 days (3 nights)- with a day trip to Venice or Rome? <BR>Nice: 2 half days(1 night) <BR>Nice-Madrid: Over Night Train <BR>Madrid-Faro(Via Seville): 1 day <BR>Faro: 4 days(5 nights) <BR> <BR>Is this too much? <BR>What would you drop or reduce? <BR>Are there better places to visit? <BR> <BR>Were interested in getting a feel for the different cultures and seeing some historic <BR>sights. <BR> <BR>Wish we had more time but we don't!

lindy

I'm sure this is partly personal preference, but my advice (based on personal preference) would be to think a lot about attempting to see so many places in such a limited amount of time. You are planning flying visits to countries speaking four different languages and will be spending proportionately more time packing and unpacking than any other thing on the trip. I guess my advice would be to see two cities more thoroughly and then find your warm beach for a few days, or you could consider some kind of city-country division between, say Paris and Brittany-Normandy, then Florence, then the beach. I would find the thought of navigating through so many different countries in so few days logistically daunting!

martha

I agree with Lindy that you're trying to fit too much into the trip. I would go for a minimum of four days in Paris and three in Florence (more if you want to take any side trips). Are you stopping in Bern because there's something you want to see or because it's a sort of midpoint? Can Nice count as your beach stop? Another way to incorporate a city/country split into your time would be to spend some time in Burgundy (handy midpoint between Paris and Florence) or adding more time to your stay in Italy and seeing Tuscany. <BR>Basically, if you've got three weeks and want beach time, I'd say limit yourselves to two major cities and two countries--three if you must.

michele

I agree with the previous postings. I woudl focus on one area of one country and combine a city stay with day trips to the country. For example, last year I spent about eight days in Barcelona and rented a car adn drove through the mountains and towns of northern Spain and then down the Costa Brava. Also, Faro isn't worth that much time..two days max. <BR>

Maira

Steve, I am sure you might have realized by now that the itinerary you proposed is not a good idea. If you are set on seeing as many countries as possible in 3 weeks, look into a tour company who will take the tremendous planning that is involved and make it easier for you. <BR> <BR>Otherwise, select a maximum of three countries and try the itinerary drill again! <BR> <BR>Recommended for a first timer with three weeks? A combo of European capitals; London-Paris-Rome. <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR>

elaine

I understand your desire to see as much as possible on your first continental trip, but all the previous responses are good advice. <BR>What you will remember most about the itinerary you have planned is packing and unpacking, and transportation headaches. You don't mention if you will be driving or taking trains, but either way, the transportation will take more time out of your trip and more enjoyment out of your experience than you think. <BR>You ask for suggestions on other places, so I'm thinking that perhaps you are not dead set on going to Bern and Faro. <BR>A day trip to Rome or Venice from Florence will take most of the day just in traveling, and the only thing you're likely to get out of it is the right to say you've been there. By all means see Florence if you enjoy art, historic bldgs, and pretty countryside. You could spend 2 or 3 days in Florence, easily, just seeing the principal sights, and then perhaps take a side trip into the countryside or to see Siena. <BR>You can stick to a train line and go from Paris to Nice (stopping in Burgundy on the way if you want) and on to Venice or Rome. I believe there is also a train that goes from Barcelona to to Nice to Venice, and branches up to Paris from Nice. Venice needs at least a couple of days (or a lifetime, as far as I'm concerned) and Rome certainly requires a minimum of 3 days to see the highlights. <BR>If you do decide to see Venice, on the way you can take a detour from Milan and spend some relaxing days on one of the beautiful Italian lakes. Not a sand beach, but water and outstanding scenery. Are you going in a nice season? <BR>And two days in Paris is also short shrift. Four day minimum is my recommendation and that's a concession on my part because even longer is not enough. <BR>The best advice is to just pick two major cities, spend a week in each with some day excursions, and end with several days on the beach. However, if I wanted more variety I would do either <BR>A. Paris (4 days + 1 for a daytrip=5), <BR>Rome (4),Florence or Venice (4),end at one of Italian lakes. (I'm not counting your travel days as sightseeing days. If you do get to sightsee on those days think of it as bonuses, not guarantees.) OR, <BR>B. Rome (4), Venice or Florence (3) Paris (5), Barcelona (3), costa del sol. <BR> <BR>When it comes to setting priorities you will get as many opinions as there are travelers. Good luck. <BR>

elaine

I understand your desire to see as much as possible on your first continental trip, but all the previous responses are good advice. <BR>What you will remember most about the itinerary you have planned is packing and unpacking, and transportation headaches. You don't mention if you will be driving or taking trains, but either way, the transportation will take more time out of your trip and more enjoyment out of your experience than you think. <BR>You ask for suggestions on other places, so I'm thinking that perhaps you are not dead set on going to Bern and Faro. <BR>A day trip to Rome or Venice from Florence will take most of the day just in traveling, and the only thing you're likely to get out of it is the right to say you've been there. By all means see Florence if you enjoy art, historic bldgs, and pretty countryside. You could spend 2 or 3 days in Florence, easily, just seeing the principal sights, and then perhaps take a side trip into the countryside or to see Siena. <BR>You can stick to a train line and go from Paris to Nice (stopping in Burgundy on the way if you want) and on to Venice or Rome. I believe there is also a train that goes from Barcelona to to Nice to Venice, and branches up to Paris from Nice. Venice needs at least a couple of days (or a lifetime, as far as I'm concerned) and Rome certainly requires a minimum of 3 days to see the highlights. <BR>If you do decide to see Venice, on the way you can take a detour from Milan and spend some relaxing days on one of the beautiful Italian lakes. Not a sand beach, but water and outstanding scenery. Are you going in a nice season? <BR>And two days in Paris is also short shrift. Four day minimum is my recommendation and that's a concession on my part because even longer is not enough. <BR>The best advice is to just pick two major cities, spend a week in each with some day excursions, and end with several days on the beach. However, if I wanted more variety I would do either <BR>A. Paris (4 days + 1 for a daytrip=5), <BR>Rome (4),Florence or Venice (4),end at one of Italian lakes. (I'm not counting your travel days as sightseeing days. If you do get to sightsee on those days think of it as bonuses, not guarantees.) OR, <BR>B. Rome (4), Venice or Florence (3) Paris (5), Barcelona (3), costa del sol. <BR> <BR>Don't forget to look into intraEuropean <BR>plane fares, you may find that flying is not tremendously more expensive than first class or overnights on the trains. <BR> <BR>When it comes to setting priorities you will get as many opinions as there are travelers. Good luck. <BR>

elaine

I understand your desire to see as much as possible on your first continental trip, but all the previous responses are good advice. <BR>What you will remember most about the itinerary you have planned is packing and unpacking, and transportation headaches. You don't mention if you will be driving or taking trains, but either way, the transportation will take more time out of your trip and more enjoyment out of your experience than you think. <BR>You ask for suggestions on other places, so I'm thinking that perhaps you are not dead set on going to Bern and Faro. <BR>A day trip to Rome or Venice from Florence will take most of the day just in traveling, and the only thing you're likely to get out of it is the right to say you've been there. By all means see Florence if you enjoy art, historic bldgs, and pretty countryside. You could spend 2 or 3 days in Florence, easily, just seeing the principal sights, and then perhaps take a side trip into the countryside or to see Siena. <BR>You can stick to a train line and go from Paris to Nice (stopping in Burgundy on the way if you want) and on to Venice or Rome. I believe there is also a train that goes from Barcelona to to Nice to Venice, and branches up to Paris from Nice. Venice needs at least a couple of days (or a lifetime, as far as I'm concerned) and Rome certainly requires a minimum of 3 days to see the highlights. <BR>If you do decide to see Venice, on the way you can take a detour from Milan and spend some relaxing days on one of the beautiful Italian lakes. Not a sand beach, but water and outstanding scenery. Are you going in a nice season? <BR>And two days in Paris is also short shrift. Four day minimum is my recommendation and that's a concession on my part because even longer is not enough. <BR>The best advice is to just pick two major cities, spend a week in each with some day excursions, and end with several days on the beach. However, if I wanted more variety I would do either <BR>A. Paris (4 days + 1 for a daytrip=5), <BR>Rome (4),Florence or Venice (4),end at one of Italian lakes. (I'm not counting your travel days as sightseeing days. If you do get to sightsee on those days think of it as bonuses, not guarantees.) OR, <BR>B. Rome (4), Venice or Florence (3) Paris (5), Barcelona (3), costa del sol. <BR> <BR>Don't forget to look into intraEuropean <BR>plane fares, you may find that flying is not tremendously more expensive than first class or overnights on the trains. <BR> <BR>When it comes to setting priorities you will get as many opinions as there are travelers. Good luck. <BR>

elvira

I love whirlwind tours, but yours is overwhelming; try thinking North or South. Paris, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, Switzerland (not all of them, but that neck of the woods) or Paris, Nice, Spain, Italy (ditto). For nice beaches, those that run north of Barcelona up to Perpignan, France are beautiful and quiet. They aren't the jet set style of the Riviera/Provence or the Italian Riviera, but cater more to families (read: not as expensive). <BR>The poster who commented your itinerary would have you travelling too much was right; don't spend sightseeing time cooped up in a train!

Jeanie

Steve, <BR>I think I am going to be the only person to say that your itinerary is fine. I admit that you are seeing quite a bit, but that is fine. Everyone has their own style. I feel like I want to see as much as I can since I paid so much to get there. You can always rearrange your schedule if you get tired or if you decide you really like a place. But it's not a crime to plan on seeing lots of places, then you know where you return to the next time. <BR>I would actually agree with all the time you have listed for the cities. I am not the biggest fan of Paris (I can hear everyone disagreeing with me right now), so two days will be plenty. Amsterdam is small and there isn't that much to do unless you want to see tons of museums. I have never been to Bern, but from what I have heard 2 days would be more than plenty. 2 days in Florence is fine, but your day trip idea probably isn't possible. I have heard Nice is overrated and has a rocky beach, so one day is plenty. I would maybe want to see the other towns on the Riviera, but that is just my preference. We are also planning on spending 3 days in Faro. <BR>Just go with your gut instinct. Everyone has a different travel style. Some like to keep moving (like me) and others like to relax more. Don't be pressured into cutting out cities just because others disagree with you. I have done a more hectic tour of Europe and I survived just fine. A simple solution, don't unpack every time you arrive in a city. so your clothes are wrinkled? you will be able to see so many more sights!

Martha

Hi, Steve-- <BR>You don't say when you are going to travel, or where you are coming from, but in general I don't think European beaches compare with the US ones. You certainly can't plan on tropical conditions, even in the Portuguese Algarve. You've already gotten a lot of suggestions, but here's one more: Amsterdam to Barcelona by way of Paris and the Loire and/or Dordogne valleys of France. This would give you variety without huge amounts of travelling time. If you have great weather when you get to Barcelona, you can hit the beaches of the Costa Brava. (The area between Barcelona and Perpignan mentioned by Elvira, above.) If the weather isn't great, there's plenty to see in Barcelona and the nearby towns of Girona and Tarragona. Or you can slip back into France and see Avignon and Arles. There's so much to see in Europe-- don't worry about what you missed. Just concentrate on having a great time with whatever you do see! <BR>Martha

lynn

Hi Steve - <BR> <BR>As indicated above, this is too much for 17 days. <BR> <BR>If it were me, I pretty much agree with Maira, pick a couple of the major cities (and then I would add a couple not so major) and go for it. <BR> <BR>I would stick to the northern area and hit the cities of... <BR> <BR>Paris - London - Amsterdam - Brussels - Brugges ---- all of these are fairly close together and offer a cross section of cultures. Rome would be good, but it's so far away that I think it would be wiser to save it for another time. <BR> <BR>I would spend 5 days in Paris, 5 days in London, 2 days in Amsterdam, and then 1 or 2 days in each Brussels and Brugges (or, somewhere else around this area that appeals to you). <BR> <BR>Also, I'd save beach time for home when it wasn't costing me thousands of dollars! Even if you don't live in a beach area, you probably have one closer than Europe. You can't visit places like the Eiffel Tower at home but you can go to the beach. Of course, that's just by opinion. <BR> <BR>Whatever you decide, have a great time!! Europe is great...

Brian

Hello Steve, <BR> <BR>I think your itinerary sounds fine. I have done extensive traveling throughout Europe and have done more than what you have in mind and had a great time. <BR>I agree with an earlier poster, who stated that it depends on your style of traveling. I am not the type of person to stay in one city, no matter how great it is, for 5 days. So if you like to be on the go and will get bored spending 5 days in like say Paris, your itinerary is just fine and especially if you do want to see every single church and museum in one city. <BR>The beaches in the Algarve are excellent and I think they are comparable with or even better than some beaches in Florida, California, or anywhere. <BR>Don't let some of the posters on this forum dissaude you from doing a whirlwind tour since it has its advantages as well. Can you imagine if you planned three weeks in just 2 or 3 cities and booked all your hotels and such and ended up not enjoying these places? I think that would be a waste of valuable vacation time and money. Also having a flexible itinerary gives you more freedom to stay longer or shorter in any of your stops. One other suggestion, Bern might one of those stops that you could shorten by day and spend an extra day elsewhere. Have fun in Europe!! <BR> <BR>

Jay Frank

You have, and will, receive a great deal of input about limiting your itinerary. I strongly suggest you ignore them. <BR> <BR>My wife and I (in our 50's) experienced the following 21-day rail vacation: <BR> <BR> Munich-&gt;Strasbourg-&gt;Bern/Luzern-&gt; <BR> Venice-&gt;Paris-&gt;Brugge-&gt;Brussels-&gt; <BR> Munich <BR> <BR>The whole experience was remarkable. Go for it! (But, try to get a bit more time in Venice...) <BR> <BR>Good luck. <BR> <BR> <BR>

April

I suggest spending another day in Amsterdam. We were there a week and it wasn't long enough. <BR>

Marcie

I'm pooped just reading your proposed itinerary! I think you're doing WAY too much and as someone else mentioned, far too much packing and unpacking. For this reason, have you considered a cruise? This way you could originate in one major city (say Rome or ?) spend several days prior to the cruise, then hit lots of ports along the way and end up in another major city (say Barcelona or ?) some cruises end in France as well if you wanted say Paris or the beach (say Nice). I think this would satisfy your need to see alot without all the hassle of packing, unpacking, trains etc.We did something similar 2 years ago and saw so much without a lot of agrivation. Just another thought with all the others. Good luck.

dan

Bern is a nice city, but you can see it in a day, easily. I would add an extra day for Paris and have one less in Bern, unless you are going there for a particular reason. Only two days in Paris may leave you disappointed unless you know you can go back soon. If you are going to Bern to visit Switzerland, you may wish to consider going to somewhere around Interlaken instead and spending a couple of days in the Alps. I also think it would be more efficient to start in Amsterdam (unless there is a big difference on airfare) and then go south. It does seem like a lot of travelling, but I don't see why it can't be done. I think it is better to limit yourself to two to three neighboring countries in that time frame, but of course that is a personal preference.

mwg

Just like 95% of the commentators, I think your itinerary packs too much in. I don't know if you've already booked air fare but your alternative would be a circular itinerary, landing and departing from the same city, or a linear one, landing in one city and departing from another. It's then really up to you to pick the destinations. One interesting alternative is a circular trip in central Europe. Starting in Paris, for example, you could go to southern Germany (perhaps by way of Alsace, then Innsbruck, then northern Italy (Como, Venice, or Florence (only 1 or 2 of these), across to Nice (there are places with nicer sand beaches nearby but Nice is an interesting place) and gthen back to Paris. A trip like that combines different cultures without overwhelming travel and makes a reasonable circle. There are many many options but you don't want to spend your whole trip on the train. Also, overnight train rides sound exotic but sometimes the trains stop in the middle of the night and you get little sleep.