Hi all!

At the risk of sounding stupid, travelling in Europe for our honeymoon sounds so overwhelming! We've narrowed down our travel to the following. Hope to hear your critiques and comments! Thanks in advance.

London -- 4D/4N -- (enough?)
-- travel via Easyjet (is this better than train travel, at this point?)

Amsterdam -- 2D/1N
-- travel via Train

Berlin -- 3D/3N
-- travel via (Plane or Train)???

Paris -- 4D/3N
-- travel via (Plane or Train)???

Venice -- 2D/1N
-- travel via trenitalia

Rome -- 5D/4N

Is this itinerary feasible? Basically, we are sooo confused as to take the train of the cheap airplanes.

Appreciate all the help!

Hi TF,

I think that you are doing a lot of traveling and little honeymooning.

You lose at least 1/2 day each time you move, so your 2 days in Amsterdam are closer to 1 day.

May I suggest:

Fly into London 4N
Eurostar to Paris 5N
www.myair.com to Venice 3N
Train to Rome 4N
Fly home

This will give you enough time in each city to get to know it a little bit, and you won't be constantly on the move.

Happy Honeymoon.

I would shuffle the itinerary to
this: London, Paris, Rome, Venice, Berlin, and finish in Amsterdam. I would cut London down to 3D/3N and up Amsterdam to 3D/3N. I would use the trains, overnight. They are more convenient than planes. The itinerary looks good for a 15 day Eurailpass "Super Flexi" which would give you 10 days of travel together in a two month period for $608 each. That is more days than you need but you can take interesting day trips from the major cities. There is a supplemental fee for overnight cabins which ranges from about $20 to $40 per person, depending on the train and the country. This pass also gives you a discount on the Eurostar train from London to Paris. Check it out at www.raileurope.com.

going somewhere for 2d/1n is hardly ever worth it IMO. especially when you are talking about the distances you are. people never consider how long it takes to get from the train station to the hotel and get settled and then you have to do it all again the very next day.

hopping countries by train sounds great if you are not used to this sort of thing, but in fact the novelty will soon wear off and you'll find the hours spent waiting for and riding on the train boring and tiring...therefore, this time should be kept to the minimum.

i don't know where you have already been in europe or what motivates you so i'm going way out on a limb here but amsterdam and berlin would be my candidates to remove from the itinerary.

for the train vs. air, yes, air is much more popular in europe for the moment. it is generally cheaper and quicker. i prefer the train, all things being equal but to take a train from london deep into the continent is something that i or most other people in europe would probably never do these days. i think a lot of first time visitors have a misunderstanding of the amount of time that it takes to travel by train around europe or the expense involved.

The biggest problem with making the 2D1N trip is that you don't have two days. You get up in London, get to an airport, fly to Amsterdam and get to your hotel. What's left of that day? Maybe and afternoon? Then the next day you get up and begin your journey to Berlin. Even if you wait until noon to do that, you have had only 2 half days in Amsterdam, not 2 full days. Why go at all?

I would cut 2 cities and keep the same amount of time. As others have already mentioned you are just doing too much running around.

2D/1N anywhere doesn't work because you lose a 1/2 day getting there and a 1/2 day the very next in leaving.

I'd cut London and Berlin. Or Berlin and Rome.

Book you plane ticket open jaw, which means you fly into the first city and out of the last (into London out of Venice or into Amsterdam out of Rome for example) to avoid backtracking on the ground at the end of your trip.

I kindly suggest, you will also find it much less overwhelming to plan if you don't try to go so many places.

Ira has a good plan--take heed.

ira has nailed it.

Yep, Ira has the plan you want to follow. Have you considered that Paris and Venice are the two most romantic cities and maybe you should limit you honeymoon to these two? Of course, if you're including Rome for the Papal Blessing, that would be a nice memory, too.

I agree it's too many cities - too much travel.

But I'd also highly recommend swapping one of these big cities for something smaller, where you can get away from the bustle and noise of the city and relax. If you're not used to busy urban environments, 3 straight weeks of big city life can be very tiring.

On both our honeymoon (Barcelona/Menorca/Madrid) and a more recent trip (Florence/Montepulciano/Rome) the second stop was a much enjoyed break from the busier cities.

Maybe an Italian lake town, or a small town in France or Germany?

brian makes an excellent point. even a "city person" can tire of these big, busy cities.

rome, paris and london are extremely crowded, berlin and amsterdam less so but still huge, busy cities. it is possible to relax a bit in venice if you wander out a bit...but no doubt still a bustling large city. traveling around to one huge city after the next might have a compounding effect that will wear you out.

you don't need to be seeing art and culture every second of the day...relax a little.

I absolutely agree with Ira's suggestion.

Ira's suggestion is great, but I might suggest doing it in a little different order -- London, fly to Venice (good cheap options available), train to Rome, (fly to Paris) and home from Paris. There's nothing like ending a romantic trip in Paris, and normally you can get much better prices on open jaw flights with London and Paris, rather than London and Rome (at least that's my experience).

If your screen name has any resemblence to your mode of travel, TravelFreak, then here is my advice. You are honeymooners so you are young. I don't know how old but most certainly younger than I.

I have traveled around Europe for decades but I feel that I am just getting started, at age 63. In January I did a rounder of Europe with a Eurailpass. I used night trains (EuroCityNight, EuroNight, ICN, etc.) almost exclusively. These trains are beautiful. You leave from city center and arrive in city center. I carry on board a bottle of wine, some local cheese, ham, bread, and an orange. I fix my supper in the cabin. I have a perfect sleep, unless the train stops. The conductor holds your ticket, and passport sometimes. You wake up in a new city, refreshed and ready to roll every morning. Cabins in the night trains normally have toilets. Often they have showers. Hey, that sounds great for a honeymoon.

Compare that to lining up for a plane a couple of hours before departure and then finding your way to the city on arrival. Ugh! Ugh! Ugh!

I'm sorry fellow Fodorites, this is a no-brainer for me. Go train, and go all the way!

For those who think that TravelFreak's itinerary is too much geography in too short a time, I agree. You would be right unless you had more time and money. But these are honeymooners and probably won't be able to do a trip like this for another 5 or 10 years after the "I do." Their self-made plan is much better than taking a guided tour in somebody's tour bus.

My personal preference would be to skip Berlin and take in Duesseldorf and Koeln for Germany. Alternatively I would try Salzburg, Munich, or Dresden instead of Berlin. If you like New York City you might like Berlin. I would not do Venice except as a stopover, without a night in the town. That's all I needed for Venice.

I didn't comment on these items in my first reply because I just responded to TravelFreak's specific questions and suggested a modified itinerary for the cities that TF wanted.

To all who replied : Many THANKS, really!

Hopscotch had it spot on : The reason we tried to cram so much is because, much as we would really really like to visit Europe again, it realistically isn't going to happen in the next 5 years or so... at least not for this long (20 days).

Actually, we couldn't move Berlin, because we are have tickets to the World Cup match to be held at the stadium there. (yeah! =) So that made it an untouchable destination.

Amsterdam, i made a typo. Actually it should be 2D/2N, coz we are arriving late at night (1st day), and leaving late on the 3rd night. I figure that to be enough..

I am pretty much still of two minds as to take the train or the plane. But my fiancee has suggested (demanded? hehe) we take the following modes of transport :

London -- Amsterdam (late plane)
Amsterdam -- Berlin (late plane)
Berlin -- Paris (late plane)
Paris -- Venice (late plane)
Venice -- Rome (twelve midnight overnight train)

As you can see, her preferred mode of transport is via plane.

I suppose I shall be thinking about the train vs plane dilemma up till the minute that I do book tickets!

That was exhausting just reading your itinerary and I am under 40!

I agree too many cities for two little time and take the night trains. If you take the plane don't forget to factor in the transportation cost/time just to get to the airports outside the cities. The trains are city center. I would cut down the number of cities and stay longer in the big cities as a base and perhaps take day trips to the smaller villages. Most tourist information centers will have info available for day trips.
If I were in your shoes (pack light 1/2 clothes you think you will need twice the $) this would be my itinerary.

Chunnel/Eurostar from London to Paris.

4 hour speed train from Paris to Amsterdam. (Get out of A-dam and see the beautiful towns in Holland).

Exception to the rule here. Fly from A-dam to Italy. Schipol is an easy airport and a favorite for many travelers. Just go to the train station city center of A-dam. Take the shuttle trains to the Airport.

Cut down the days in Rome, pick up Florence.

Save Berlin for your Anniversary trip to Austria/Germany/Switzerland.

First time to Europe advise. Beware of pickpockets every major tourist city has them. And do your research if you plan to take a taxi. How to identify a legal taxi.

Try 1-800 Fly Europe website for open jaw tickets. I just bought my May tickets Chicago to London/ Paris to Chicago for less than I was finding anywhere else for same city round trip tickets.

Sorry,
Must not have scrolled down far enough to catch your last post.

IMHO your itineray is still exhausting.
If you must go to Berlin I would cut out London and stay on the main land.

Although London and Paris are completely different they are the same in the big city sense. Cut out a large city like others were commenting. Also, London is the city you can find great deals for if you ever have an opportunity in the next 10 years to do a long weekend trip.

"I would not do Venice except as a stopover, without a night in the town. That's all I needed for Venice."
LOL!
hopscotch, this is not fair. They are first timers in Europe, they're seeking actual advice and not sardonic mockery at their schedule!
TravelFreak, the reason why hopscotch would play this joke with you is that your 2D/1N plan for Venice IS ridiculous for anybody who knows enough about that city. For the first time in Venice, you'll need AT LEAST 5D/4N to get just a superficial first impression; if you can't or don't want to spend that much time in Venice, you should absolutely skip it entirely and save it for your next trip to Europe - in 5 or 10 years, it's still going to be there...

Franco,
Haven't your heard. Venice is sinking!

Travelfreak, In fact the last time I was in Venice (2004) they had just started major construction and it was not as picture perfect as the first time I was there. Believe me two days is enough for Venice.