tstead

Hi,

Im in the initial stages of planning a 2.5 month holiday to Europe from Australia. This will be our (my wife and I) first trip to Europe so we are looking at getting a bit of a taste of what Europe has to offer.

We are looking to travel from the 21st of March through to the 6th of June. The current draft looks like this.

6 nights in Rome
3 nights in Florence
3 nights in the Tuscan countryside. (will hire a car to see the countryside)
2 nights in Venice
2 nights in Milan
2 nights in Nice
6 nights in southern France (split between Avignon and Aix en Provence, will hire a car for this region)
5 nights in Barcelona
2 nights in Bilbao
2 nights in San Sebastian
5 nights in Paris
4 nights in the Loire Valley (will hire a car for this portion)
2 nights in Reims
4 nights in Brussels
4 nights in Amsterdam
4 nights in Berlin
3 nights in Prague
2 nights in Nuremberg
1 night in Rothernburg (will hire a car for this portion)
1 night in Augsburg (will hire a car for this portion)
2 nights in Fussen (will hire a car for this portion)
3 nights in Munich
3 nights in Salzburg
3 nights in Vienna
2 nights in Dubai

We have tried to get a mixture of big cities and smaller towns/cities. Also have tried to break things up with the hiring of cars to slow down the pace and explore an area a little more in depth.

Will be travelling by train for majority of the trip with planes for the longer moves (to Barcelona, Bilbao, Paris, Berlin)

Any advice on the initial itinerary would be appreciated.

Thanks

suze

That pace, and keeping it up for over 2 months, would kill me!! I'm exhausted just reading the list. I know everyone's different, but with such an extensive trip, I'd build in several times where I stayed put for a week in the same place.

adrienne

Australians are certainly robust people!

I hesitate to comment because of another thread by an Australian family with a similar schedule - they claim that they are used to long distances and lots of travel.

An agenda such as yours would wear me out and I would never travel again. If you can go at this pace then do it.

My advice is travel to fewer countries and explore each area more in depth.

StCirq

Totally agree with suze. This is a road rally. And 4 nights in Brussels is about 2-3 too many. Unless you have a really good reason to aim primarily at big cities, rent a few places in the countryside along the way and relax!

nytraveler

A couple of notes:

Unless you have some strong reason to hang around Brussels one day there is plenty - it's not one of the great beauty spots - more the center of the CM

Milan is fine for fashion and business, but again - not a great beauty spot

You have not allowed for time to get from one place to another - so you actually have less time that you think anywhere. It will take from half to a full day to get from one city to another - so 2 nights in a city means one (1) day - not 2.

I would cut out several places and add another day to several of the more intresting cities: Nice and area, Prague, Venice, etc.

goldenautumn

I'm sure everyone would do a different trip for 2.5 months (I know I would!), but assuming you want to stick with your choices, then logistically:

Put the Tuscan countryside between Rome and Florence.

Go to Milan before going to Venice so you can fly from Venice to Nice.

Consider Antwerp rather than Brussels as the more congenial city to be in with good train connections to other places in Belgium.

bobthenavigator

Too many hotels!
Drop Brusssels and Milan and only have 2 locations in Bavaria.
Add time to Venice. We did 8 weeks one trip, but in only about half the square miles. Add a 2 day respite in the middle and do nothing but wash clothes etc.

michele_d

We spent three months in Europe and I am really glad we took little 'vacations from our vacation' every three weeks or so. We stayed one full week in apts in four different locations, spaced out throughout our trip. The other stays were a minimum of three nights, but mostly 4 nights each, with only a couple two night stays.

2 1/2 months is a long time to travel. I would concentrate on fewer destinations, with longer stays in each and take some day trips from those locations.

styrx

We backpacked several years ago in Europe for 4 months using a combinations of bus and train, and your itinerary looks as hectic and packed like mine! I agreed with what the rest had said, it is really tiring traveling this way. The stress and tiredness will kick in from the 2nd or 3rd weeks of traveling.

You need to put in some rest days and give each others some space and time. Traveling as a couple can be tough, and I can assure you there will be a lot of disagreements even though you are newly wed.

Your sequence of traveling looks good to me, but I noticed that you are missing out some major places like Madrid and Switzerland? Is there a reason for this?

I will also suggest you to take out those 1 night stopover and add it on to those 2 nights, which will give you ample time to rest and really see a place. I will say a combinations of 4 nights for major cities like Barcelona, Paris and Prague... will be good. And 3 nights for smaller cities like Venice, Arles, lorie Valley...

You can read my blog for some ideas and the places we visited in 2007 if you are interested. I have not finished updating the posts, so do just browse and hope it helps you.
http://www.travelathousandmiles.com/on-the-road-2/

artsnletters

I once spent four months in Europe, traveling at a pace at least this busy. Admittedly I was young (mid-20s), but I had a grand time and got what I wanted from the trip at that time - seeing lots of art, history and architecture. At the time I really wasn't much interested in culture, so I didn't really need time to soak it all up.

The idea to plan a couple short breaks is a good one, though. There comes a day every three weeks or so when you just aren't up to doing anything - you veg out and that's a day you don't see what you had planned on, so you might just as well build it in and not miss anything you had your heart set on.

kja

You've already gotten some great advice!

Let me start off by saying that I don't mind a fast pace of travel and I'm willing to change hotels much more frequently than most Fodorites - even every day or so.

That said, this itinerary would not be enjoyable for me. I would be worn out within the first few weeks, and from then on, I would be too miserably exhausted to make wise decisions about how to proceed.

As others have noted, you don't seem to be taking travel times into consideration. It isn't just the time it takes to get from city A to city B -- its the time it takes to check into/out of hotels, get to/from your transportation, get oriented to your new city (plan on getting lost occasionally!), adjusting your ear (and tongue) to a new language, etc. So think through your itinerary with the idea that you will lose at least 1/2 day for each change in destination - more for your longer transits. You might be able to move more quickly than that, but if so, I'm confident that you'll find many wonderful ways to fill your time. In contrast, failing to plan sufficient time for transitions can be a recipe for disaster.

Also keep in mind that days aren't necessarily all equal. For example, there are many locations where museums and other tourist destinations are closed on Mondays and/or Sunday afternoons and/or other times. If museums or other places that have opening/closing times are high on your list of priorities for any of these cities, make sure you plan accordingly.

Hope that helps!

adeben

Looks a lot like the schedule for our first trip to Europe from Australia many years ago.
Here's some suggestions:
1* Rather than 2 nights each for San Sebastian and Bilbao, try 3 nights in San Sebastian, and take the bus to Bilbao on one day to visit the Guggenheim, and have a general glance around. From memory, the bus ride takes about an hour, and is a frequent service.
2* Be aware that, due to travelling time, 2 nights in a place generally equals 1 day. Nuremberg needs two days, one of which can be spent visiting the Nazi Party Museum, and the Zeppelin Field where the rallies were led in the 1930s. It's a shortish tram ride from the train station to this venue. Nuremberg itself is a most attractive city, with plenty to occupy you on the other day.
3* On the other hand, Salzburg does not need 3 nights: I'd reduce that to 2.
4* I like Prague, but I'd remove it from this trip and save it for another time. Go directly from Berlin to Nuremberg and save yourself a lot of travel hassle. Spend more time in Prague at a later date.
5* Unless you have unstated personal reasons for visiting Brussels, I wouldn't bother. Add the nights saved to Berlin: Berlin deserves more than 4 nights, particularly if you are considering a day trip to Potsdam (and that's worth considering!)
6* 2 nights in Dubai! Been there: done that: and won't do it again!
We remember our first trip as being pretty hectic, and yours will be too. I hope you enjoy the experience as much as we did.

rhon

I have to agree with what others are saying. Too busy. Not enough time to enjoy being there. But we are Australian and I know why this happens. It costs a lot more to fly from Australia and twice as long. It takes us 30 hours from walking out our front door to landing in Europe. We look with envy at people from the US who fly to France or Italy or the UK for a 10 day trip. Just does not happen for us. So people often see this as their one chance to do this. Yes in Australia we are used to travelling long distances. But that is on highways with 100kms between towns [ we regularly travel the Newell highway to Canberra] with nothing to see. Not going to happen in Europe unless you are on the Autoroute/Strada/bahn. And then you are missing the good bits.

We did rush our first trip, but not to this extent. Trip of a lifetime, will never be able to afford to do this again. [ Son getting married in the UK in 2004 ]. We had 6 weeks in the UK, 4 days in France and fell in love. Sounds relatively slow by comparison but we felt rushed.

I could not do 10 weeks in hotels or B&B's. In the UK, after 10 days I am so sick of small rooms, nowhere to sit other than the bed [ we travel on a budget so no luxury hotels for us !!], having to go out for an evening meal every night. Sounds great at first but we soon get sick of it. Not being able to have a decent cuppa.

We are now " slow travellers". We decided on our second trip that even if it would be our last we were going to take our time. I know we will never get to half , no make that a quarter of the places mentioned here. But the places we have seen we have loved and we remember. And it is often the small things that are precious to remember. We have found a way to travel which is affordable and suits us. So I hope you will look at your plan and prune it a little. Take a longer stay in a few places. Make it less about ticking boxes and more about being there with time to say Wow. Remember these places have been there for an awfully long time and will still be there in the future.

But ultimately it is your trip. It is your money and your time that you will be spending. So you have to do what is right for you. I hope you have a wonderful trip whatever you decide.

For what it is worth, we have now had 26 weeks in France since 2006 and are in the process of planning trip five for 2014.

mamcalice

I agree with the advice above. Cut out Brussels, Milan and Prague and add the time to Tuscany, the Loire Valley and Provence so you have some downtime from the constant travel. I would also find a way to eliminate the one and two-nighters in Germany and consolidate those stops in some way. You can also do Reims as a day trip from Paris and spend a week in Paris in an apartment. Think of ways to add a day to Venice. Longer stays in fewer places will be much more enjoyable.

Have a great trip!

isabel

I think with just a little tweaking you can improve your itinerary.

For Italy, do your 6 nights Rome, then do 6 in Florence. Skip the rental car, you can get to Siena, Lucca, and other "Tuscan" towns via bus or train from a base in Florence. That eliminates a hotel and the rental car. Yes, you might miss a few small towns but you'll get a taste of it. Skip Milan and do 4 nights in Venice, you can do a day trip via train to Padua or Verona for another experience. That cuts out a second hotel.

For your nine nights in the south of France use two instead of three bases - probably Nice and either Avignon or Aix - or maybe St Remy or somewhere between them. That cuts out a third hotel. You could spend a day in Aix en route from Nice to Avignon if you don't want to back track.

For your nine nights in Spain I would probably just pick one location instead of three, and maybe by now you might want to rent an apartment for the whole time as a mini break from your vacation. But at most I would do two, not three.

Now you have 11 nights in France. I would do Paris and one other location. Your Paris and Loire Valley timing look OK, I would probably drop Reims and add those two days, one each to Belgium and Netherlands. That would mean five days each and I would pick one base in each country (Antwerp rather than Brussels) and do day trips by train.

I'm not as familiar with the areas in the rest of your itinerary but I agree with the others that, especially this far into your trip, you will not enjoy that many one and two night stays. You have about three weeks left and have listed nine places. I would really try to drop/condense it to four max.

Picking bases and doing day trips makes a lot of sense for longer trips ( and I've never done one anywhere close to this long). That way if you turn out to be tired you can skip a day trip and just stay put - you aren't committed to a hotel, car rental, etc. You may do some extra 'backtracking' but what you get in return is a lot more flexibility. With approximately week long stays you can also add in more apartments. I actually am not a fan of apartments over hotels but on a trip of this length I'd probably want at least a couple of them thrown in.

crazyfamilyof4

Im in the same tricky situation! Us Aussies must be so full of extra energy! Look forward to reading your tweaks!

goldenautumn

I disagree with the advice to use "bases" in italy or Spain and daytrip unless you mainly want to take pictures of buildings when no people are about. Both these countries have long afternoon closures, and unless you get up very early in the morning to make it to train platforms on time, you will won't reach the historic centers of your daytrip destinations to be part of the town life when things are open. They won't open up again until 4pm (in Spain, later). Most people want to start heading back to their hotels before dinner -- meaning they are back on the train platform at 5 or so. It can be quite frustrating to people if they have specifically gone to a town to see the inside of a church or palace, or a museum, and be effectively shut out for 4 hours. Likewise, a special shop. It sometimes turns out people don't see what they came all that way to see.

With respect to the Tuscan countryside, it is next to impossible to get any real sense of it "daytripping" from Florence without a car unless you hire a driver or take one or two limited bus runs that are tricky to figure out. So if the original point of including Tuscany beyond Florence is not to visit towns but to see the Tuscan scenery, "basing" in Florence and visiting towns by train and bus is going to bypass the scenery.

Part of the fun of Milan is the city's nightlife, so I am not surprised people who prefer a daytripping style of travel in Italy tell you to skip it and daytrip to Padova. Although I also think not to particpate in Verona's nightlife is also to miss a key understanding and enjoyment of that city.

It really depends on what you enjoy doing as a traveler. If you are looking forward to foodie treats, cocktails, wine, nice dinners, and don't mind switching hotels to get that, that's one style. If you prefer early morning hours, like to take a lot of pictures, prefer regional trains and buses for rambling, hate switching hotels, then that's another style of travel.

One is just as flexible as the other, depending on one's purposes. Up to you.

goldenautumn

Another thought:

It was suggested you skip Brussels unless you have personal reasons for going. If you like taste treats, I wouldn't miss Belgium, although I would recommend a town other than Brussels for a multi-day stay. If great food is not a major factor in choosing your destinations, then you might safely skip Belgium, but then I would suggest you skip San Sebastian and the Basque country as well at that time of year.

suze

I'm also not in favor of the using "bases" idea. I think it's fine to travel, and keep on going in a single direction from place to place.

My tweaks would be to elminate a couple of the stops that simply don't seem that interesting to me. And build in a couple "rest stops" or "vacations" from the trip as pretty much everyone has mentioned.

isabel

The OP is planning a TEN WEEK trip. Waaaay longer than most of itineraries posted here. My (and other people's) suggestion to use bases is based on the length of the trip. Moving every couple of days is fine, even desirable in many cases especially when the trip is 1 to 3 weeks long. The idea of using bases is to allow the traveler to see as many of the originally stated places as possible while maintaining a reasonable pace for that length of time.