planningtravel

I have a bit of a dilemma.......

I'm heading to Bangkok and had chosen to visit Laos for a week on my upcoming trip in October. I opted for Laos as it's not easy to get international air connections to the country (compared to flying to Burma or Vietnam), it will require less time to visit and a visa on arrival is quick and easy.

Due to availability of FF tickets I'm now adding three days onto my trip. I will be in Bangkok for exactly 16 days (not including arrival and departure days) and need to fill in the blanks for a side trip from Bangkok. My options are:-

Option 1,

6 days in Bangkok, 7 in Laos and 3 in Chiang Mai Besides the Laos hotels nothing is booked, so I have the flexibility of cancelling my reservations and reworking my itinerary.

Option 2,

Skip Laos entirely, and head off the Burma for 10 - 12 days and spend the remainder of the time in Bangkok.

I'd like to hear from people who have been to both Burma and Laos. I'm fully aware Burma is changing rapidly. I have some very stressful personal issues at present, and I'm not sure I'd be up for traveling independently in a less developed country like Burma at present. I've traveled extensively and couldn't handle some of the destinations I've been to due to the present circumstances. For this reason I keep telling myself to stick to Laos.

Then, again, I have the opportunity to visit Burma before it's commercialized. Getting time off in October in future years is a definite no because of my job responsibilities. And, it'll be difficult to take an extended time off. For these reasons, I'm saying to myself. go to Burma and leave Laos.

How challenging is travelling in Burma? Are flight schedules changed (or cancelled) and the last minute? What are the primary challenges travellers face in Burma?

Please advise, if I opt to change Laos to Burma I need to make these changes asap and apply for my Burmese visa.

Thank you.

Kathie

In general, travel in Burma is no harder than travel in Laos. October can be rainy in that whole mainland SE Area, so not the optimal time to travel, but certainly do-able... and perhaps an advantage for finding good accommodations.

Burma is already in the throes of becoming more developed. Neither Burma nor Laos is (yet) overrun with visitors. Both are good options.

For Burma, you will be best advised to utilize a local agent to make your arrangements. Sometimes flight times are changed, but having an agent means they will contact you (or your hotel) to let you know. Sometimes flights are cancelled, but if you are working with an agent, they will rebook you on another airline at a similar time, if available. There has been a proliferation of new little airlines in Burma.

Travel in Burma is much easier than it was just a few years ago. You can now use credit cards at many hotels and some shops, there are ATMs available and official money changers where you will get the best rates (unlike the old days when the black market was the way to go).

If you are interested in going to Burma, outline where you want to go. Have you done any reading about Burma? I read a couple dozen books before my first trip. There is lots of good literature on Burma, but few good guide books. There is a Lonely Planet that can give you good background info but the prices, info about money, and hotel info is wildly out of date.

Note that there isn't a wrong answer to your question, both Laos and Burma are worthy destinations.

Femi

Ditto what Kathie says.

Do you have any specific interests in mind that may be better satisfied by either destination?

planningtravel

Thank you, Kathie and Femi.

I was under the impression Laos is more developed than Burma. And, as I'd have less moving around to do it would be a less stressful trip. In Laos, I'd visit Vientiane, Vieng Vang and Luang Prabang. In Burma, I'd like to see Mandalay, Bagan and Yangon. Inle doesn't appeal as much as the other places, but I'd probably include it in my travel plans.

I focus on cultural and historic sights when travelling. Sights of natural beauty appeal less to me than those of cultural and historic significance.

I had read part of a Lonely Planet guide on Burma two years ago, and when my travel plans shaped up I only had 10 days in the region. Therefore, I neglected to visit Burma on that trip (which began in Singapore) as I wouldn't have had enough time in the country. My readings on Burma are limited to this outdated Lonely Planet guidebook and a little that I've done online.

I should have added in the op, that time off work in October, November, December and January isn't going to be possible after this year. I might be lucky to get the second half of February - might is the key word in that sentence. My new boss would prefer I take time off in May, June or September. So, that'll make visiting the last "to do" places in Asia a bit of a challenge.

planningtravel

One more comment, most of my trips to Asia begin in Singapore or Hong Kong. Starting a trip from Bangkok is very unusual for me. I am familiar with flight schedules and know that Burma is easy to get to from both places. From Singapore, I can fly to Mandalay, or Yangon. From HK, I'd only have the option of flying non stop to Yangon. Getting to Laos is a more of a challenge from Singapore or Hong Kong.

LancasterLad

<<<I focus on cultural and historic sights when travelling. Sights of natural beauty appeal less to me than those of cultural and historic significance.>>>

Vang Vieng is all about natural beauty, and outdoor adventure.

planningtravel

Fair enough, you make a valid point. VV is solely to break the long journey between Vientiane and LP. I'll only have the evening on the day I arrive in VV.

MmePerdu

Unfortunately, I didn't find Mandalay lived up to it's romantic legend. While not exactly sorry I went there, it's the first I'd remove from your possible itinerary and replace it with time at Inle Lake, probably the most interesting part of my trip in many ways. Not spoiled by congestion and disrepair as cities can be.

In answer to your question, Burma or Laos, I'd choose Burma, no question. I love Laos, have been there twice, but the riches of Burma cannot be beaten. Yangon, Bagan & Inle lake would make a wonderful introduction.

Kathie

Like MmePerdu, I found Mandalay the least interesting of the places I've visited in Burma. There are certainly things I'm glad I saw/did/experienced in the Mandalay area, but the city itself is not compelling. The Mahamuni Buddha was well worth it - especially since we went to Mrauk U the same trip. We loved Sagaing, with all the temples and monasteries and nunneries.

Inle is fascinating. We are Buddhist temple fanatics. When we were planning our first trip to Burma I was looking at photos, and found that the really unusual photos of Buddhist temples and shrines were from Inle. There is a particular iconography unique to this area, which I found fascinating.

But if you can make the time, a few days in Mandalay will round out your view of the country, but I wouldn't take time away from Bagan or Inle to do it.

We are returning to Burma in November and I can't wait!

yestravel

Mandalay was our first stop in Burma and I liked it the least. I was worried the rest of the trip was going to mirror Mandalay. It didn't.

I've only been to Luang Prabang in Laos and while i really liked it, I would not call it a cultural highligt of our time. There are things to see, but compared to other places it pales in comparisons for actual cutlural sights. We enjoyed walking around, hanging out and resting in LP as it was part of a very long journey for us to SEAsia.