hobotravels

can someone who's never been to australia reasonably see it in 2 weeks...or should i concentrate on vietnam for 10 days??

lcuy

You can see some interesting parts of australia, but it is a huge country and there is now way you could "see" Australia in 2 weeks.

You could go to Sydney, then up to the area around Cairns to see the great barrier reef, then do a trip to the interior (Ayers rock) perhaps. You would have to fly everywhere. If you wanted to see Perth, Melbourne, Tazmania or other areas, you'd have to make some choices. I really don't think it would be worth trying to visit four at the absolute max.

In Vietnam, you could take the train and go from top to bottom or vice versa in 10 days.

simpsonc510

My first (of 6) trip to Australia was for 5 weeks, and I didn't cover the west or Tasmania that time. Those locations had to wait for other OZ trips...

I would agree with lcuy that the typical first trip to Australia would be to Sydney, Cairns, and the "red" center (Ayers Rock). That would give you a taste, and probably whet your appetite for MORE as it did me.

I cannot say anything about Vietnam because I've never been. It's sure to be more "exotic" if that is something you'd want.

Carol

Carol

laurieco

Another possible place to spend time in Australia is Tasmania. Tassie is beautiful and is wonderful if you are interested in scenic national parks and wildlife.

To me, the most interesting part of Australia is the Northern Territory, including Uluru (Ayers Rock) and Kakadu. You can spend a day or two in Darwin before heading out to Kakadu, a must if you have any interest in Aboriginal culture.

Sydney is a must and I would probably put Melbourne on the list as well. I wouldn't necessarily go to Cairns on a first trip unless you want to scuba dive. Unless it's changed since 1992 (which it very well may have) Cairns is not that interesting though it is a jumping off point for the Great Barrier Reef.

Much of where you go will depend on your interests. If you decide on Australia, get a couple of good guidebooks and read what the various areas have to offer. I've been to Australia 5 times (from as few as 9 days to 4 weeks) and planning a sixth and still haven't gotten out to Western Australia, which includes Perth, and most likely won't on the next trip either. There's so much to see.

As for Vietnam, in 10 days you could start in Hanoi and spend a few nights there, go down to Hue and Hoi An and spend several nights in that area (I would say 2 or 3 in Hue and 1 or 2 in Hoi An) and if you want to, go down to Saigon for the remainder. People on this forum will undoubtedly tell you that you need more time but that is a personal decision, depending on how in depth you want this to be.

simpsonc510

Laurie

I agree with you 100% about Kakadu!! Really fascinating place.

Carol

JMGJD

I have been to Australia twice- the first time for a full two weeks and the second time I lived there for 6 months. I have also traveled extensively through Vietnam. You can definitely have a meaningful trip to Oz with two weeks. On my two week visit I went to Sydney, Ayers Rock, Cairns (Port Douglas to be exact) and Kakadu. I flew everywhere to save time. I am a scuba diver so it was important to me to go to the Reef area. If you are not a diver, you might want to cut Cairns and go to Kangaroo Island or the Barossa wine valley instead. If you cut Cairns and Kakadu, you could probably do both the Barossa and Kangaroo Island. Kangaroo Island is amazing IMO. You can get there by flying to Adelaide and taking a ferry. I believe that Adelaide is also the jumping off point for the Barossa.

You can see a few places in Vietnam in 1O days, but definitely not the whole country. Maybe Hanoi, halong Bay, Hue or Hoi An, and HCMC. But I doubt you could fit in some of the day trips and overnight trips from Hanoi (i.e. Perfume Pagoda and Sapa).

Regardless of what you choose, you will surely have a great time, as they are both fabulous countries!

poutine

You don't say what time of year you are thinking of - which may make a difference in which country you wish to head to.

We went to Austalia for 3 weeks. We thought flying all the way from the eastern side side of Canada, 3 weeks would be the minimum amount of time we would slog that far for. At the end of the trip, my husband and I both decided that two weeks (try to include three weekends) would have been fine as well. So, yes I would go to Australia for two weeks.

However, "see it", no. Pick two (max 3) destinations which aren't too far apart. Australia has a very good internal air system (at least compared to Canada).

Never been to Vietnam....

Neil_Oz

One significant difference is that Vietnam is of course a less expensive destination than Australia. If you do decide on Vietnam, you might consider taking a small-group tour. Normally we're not tour people, but we felt that our 20-day tour was a good decision, as we saw and learned more of the country than we could have as independent travellers. (Of course, you pay a premium for that over the DIY option, but it's still an economical destination.)

If you do go independently, as you have only 10 days I would be inclined to split them up roughly equally between (a) Ho Ch Minh City and Mekong Delta, (b) central coast (Hoi An-Nha Trang), (c) Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. You can fly Da Nang- Hanoi, or Hue-Hanoi, to save time. I'd skip Dalat. Obviously this itinerary would require an open jaw ticket - into HCMC, out of Hanoi or vice versa.

You could of course confine your visit to either the north OR the south of the country, but I'd be more inclined to do that if you expected to be back.

How best to spend two weeks in Australia has been discussed many, many times - go to the Australia forum and use the search facility to pull up past threads, or post a new enquiry if you prefer. As mentioned, weather will make a difference (e.g. the Centre isn't usually recommended in summer, and Tasmania is brisk in winter).

Wherever you go, I strongly support buying and studying a good guide book as early as possible.