UK to Italy

I presume you know Italy is not near Paris...

I think the first step is to get the overall grasp of the travel time.

For trains, use this site and enter some cities you are thinking of to get some magnitude of the travel time:

http://reiseauskunft.bahn.de/bin/query.exe/en

You can do the same for flying:

http://www.whichbudget.com/

In reading your post you have between October 7 and October 18 to visit London and other places in the UK, Paris and Italy. That's only 12 days - not much time when you've already mentioned 2 major cities that deserve at least 6 days each.

Please think about how you want to allocate your time (how many days in each country - you have 6 countries to cover in the 12 days) and ask more definitive questions. Also specify a price range for "budget" lodgings.

I recently went by train from London to Rome by the overnight train using the splendid "Man in Seat 61" website.
http://www.seat61.com/

The site is very good, especially with stuff about getting across Paris. It was quite an adventure with the only downside being the lack of punctuality of the Italian sleeper.
The Paris to Rome train was four hours late which didn't really matter apart from inconveniencing the agent for the flat. To her credit, she was very nice about it.
Rome to Paris was two hours late and we missed our Eurostar.
However, the Eurostar people were excellent and put us on the next available train.

Europe abounds in stable low cost aircraft from weird airports to weird airports. While you and others may not like loads of flights while on holiday it can be done. The ksy ones out of the uk are Easyjet, Ryanair (much hated as the ultimate cattle mover) Jet2.com and then a few upmaket ones like KLM as AirUK Luthansa as British Midland etc

If which (as described above) does not help look at the europe map on skyscanner

There are now flights to Italy from a couple of dozen English airports, including Liverpool (the low cost hub for NW England), Manchester, Birmingham and Bristol (the latter two being handiest to Cheltenham). And though from central London to central Paris the train's a bit faster than flying, there's a significant time saving in flying from anywhere else, and a HUGE (at least a day) flying to Italy from anywhere else

If you want to make the most of your time, you really need to avoid unnecessary journeys within England. For flight options, go to the website of the airports concenred

This is all really great information and I know I'm really trying to do something impossible. I guess I need to narrow the field a bit. I realize Italy is not near Paris and had originally thought about taking the train from Cheltenham to London after that first week with our friends and using London as a springboard to other places e.g., Eurostar to Paris and back, catch a flight to somewhere in Italy; tour around as much as I can and probably seeing London last. I had planned to fly home from London as I thought it would be more cost effective to fly in and out of the same city - am I wrong? Maybe it would be best to fly to Italy from someplace near Cheltenham; see Italy/Paris and then on to London. Your thoughts? Thanks again!

hi OcaTG,

of the budget airlines, by far the best, IMHO, is easyjet, and they do have a couple of routes that may help you.

you could, for example, instead of going back to Cheltenham, fly straight from Liverpool [very close to Chester] to Paris on easyjet. you can also fly from Rome to london Gatwick. that only leaves the trip from Paris to Rome, for which you could take the train that MissPrism talks about, and might be fun, so long as it wasn't late.

however, you will only have 3-4 days in each of these three cities, which is still quite a short time. if you were to forgoe Rome [which is worthy of a trip all of its own,] you could perhaps go to North Wales for a day or two, then fly to Paris, and return to London by the Eurostar. that would, I think, make for a fun and varied trip.

Whether it is cost effective to fly in and out of the same city has to do with what kind of airfare, among many other factors, you can get hold of rather than relying on rules.

If you are trying to reduce the TOTAL cost, then compute the TOTAL cost including flights, train, hotel, etc.

If you are trying to reduce the AIRFARE, then just looking at the airfare will accomplish the objective. You can easily pay much more in TOTAL than necessary using this strategy, however.

Most of the time (not always -- but usually) for this type of itinerary, it works out to fly open jaw into one city and home from another.

It should not cost any/much more -- and is often less when you factor in the expense of getting back to your arrival city to fly home.

But in your case R-T to London would also work.

If Paris, Rome and London are big on your wish list, consider this sort of plan: Fly into London, meet your friends, travel north. Then fly from Liverpool to Rome for a few days. Fly Rome to Paris for a few days. Train from Paris to London. Fly home from there.

Another option would be to do all the UK bits first, train to Paris, fly to Rome, fly home from Rome.

I'd personally fly Liverpool to Rome and then work my way back to London.

Do not look at two one-way tickets to figure the trip that janisj describes. Use the "multi-city" option at airline websites to check the "open jaw" options mentioned.

Great suggestions! Two things -- sounds like I won't have time any other cities in Italy except Rome. If I extend my trip a couple of days, would it be worthwhile to see Venice and if so, can I get to Paris from there? Also, am going to try to use Delta airmiles, so will probably talk with booking agent instead of website. I know best comfort is in business/first class, but how bad are the economy seats? Thanks!

The Delta website will show you options for using your miles. You might fly to London, fly home from Rome on Delta. Use other options in between (train from London to Paris, then fly Easyjet from Paris to Venice, train from Venice to Rome). There are a number of ways to arrange your choices.

However, do keep in mind that every time you change cities, it will eat up at least half a day to check in and out of hotels, travel to terminals, wait around, and actually travel. If flying is involved, it might waste even more time, since lengthy security checkins are involved and airport are usually set far outside city centers.

hi again,

sadly, you can't fly on easyjet from Liverpool to either Rome or Venice, but you can fly there from Paris or LGW.

if you followed ellenem's and janisj's ideas of travelling from the US to Europe "open jaw", from London you could take the eurostar to Paris, then fly to either Venice or Rome, train between them, and fly home from the one you pick for your transatlantic return flight. that way you avoid losing the day or so it will take out of your holiday to ge back to the UK.

"sadly, you can't fly on easyjet from Liverpool to either Rome or Venice"

No. But you CAN fly Ryanair from Liverpool to Rome. And to Treviso, which for many people is the most convenient way of getting from NW England to Venice

Thanks to everyone for your great ideas. As is typical, I suppose, our plans have changed. We are going to tour Italy, Spain, etc. in July 2011, so will focus this trip to the UK, other than a couple of days in Paris. Still flying into London, staying in Cheltenham, going to Chester and Liverpool and then who knows. I know pretty much everything else I'd like to see in London, but wonder about Ireland and/or Scotland. I can be gone as little as 2 weeks or as many as 3 weeks. Your thoughts? Thanks!

hi OCaTG,

yes, very often I start off posting one plan and end up with quite another, so yuo are by no means unusual.

As you will already be "up north" and specifically in the north west, you could take the opportunity to explore north wales, or the lake district, both of which should be lovely in late September. or you could get the train from liverpool to Glasgow and set off for the Highlands.

i would however suggest picking just one of those and doing it properly, as the travelling time in between them will mean that you could lose a lot of time on the boring bits of travelling rather the interesting bits of exploring. there is plenty in each of thos areas to amuse for the time you have.

regards, ann