Wife, two kids (8 and 10) and I will be heading to Europe next summer for three weeks, July 12-Aug 2. Which of these three itineraries would you choose?

Option 1:
London - 4 nights
Broadstairs, England - 2 nights (going to the Open Championship)
Bruges - 2 nights
Strausbourg, France - 3 nights
Rust, Germany - 1 night (Europa Park)
Wengen, Switzerland - 3 nights
Somewhere around Mittenwald - 5 nights

Option 2:
London 4 nights
Broadstairs - 2 nights
Rest of trip in England/Scotland

Option 3:
London and Broadstairs - 6 nights
Bruges - 2 nights
Burgundy and Paris the rest of the trip

Well - I probably don't the ultimate vote -- but for a family - I choose #2 first, and #3 a close second. I wouldn't do option #1 myself. Have you already booked your flights? If not -is it possible to arrive a couple of days earlier? 4 days isn't much for LOndon when the first day is mainly jetlag recovery.

If it was me -- I'd probably rent an apartment in London (and in Paris if you do option #3), spend the time after the Open either in two bases and do day trips or in a series of 2 and 3 night stops. Packing and moving every day or two gets old fast.

But it mostly depends on what you want . . .

If I was doing it alone, I'd probably go for option a, but travelling with the family, I agree with janisj and would opt for option 3 as you still get to see quite a bit, but not the hassle of a lot of travelling.

Have a fab time.

I would vote for option 3. And I would definitely try to spend more time in London. You have a good amount of time for the #3 itinerary.

Not sure so some random comments. London is marvelous but I have found city holidays more sucessful as my kids have got older. I would opt for France rather than the rest of England - weather is more reliable, nothing worse than wandering around in the rain. Personally, I found Bruges disappointing. Burgundy is beautiful, as is the Dordogne. If you were prepared to go further south for a week, consider renting a place in Provence - it's so beautiful and weather very reliable it's worth the additional distance. All your itineraries have quite a lot of travelling for youngish kids.

What are you and your family interested in, LittleA? It's hard to make suggestions without knowing more details. Have you been to any of these places before?

I agree with the above posters about spending more time in each place. Three weeks is quite a bit of time to be traveling and moving around so much, especially with kids.

Shooting blindly, I'd suggest a full week in London (you can always take great daytrips by train), a full week in Paris, and maybe split the remaining time between Bruges (which appears on 2 out of 3 of your lists)and maybe Ghent, or a smaller Belgian or French town, to give you a bit of change of pace.

Nummer Eins

You get 5 countries out of the deal and you get a day just for the kids at Europa. That can be a BIG negotiating carrot to play on a long trip.

Europa can be done very easily from Strasbourg. That would take one "move" and a single night stay off the table. You could probably cut a day off of Mittenwald, and add it to Brugge (you will likely arrive very late if you are coming from England). Some will say that Brugge is not worth 3 nights but if one is a late arrival, you have Ghent, or Damme, or the beach, or some WW I history that could easily complete the time. It would look like this

London 4
Broadstairs 2
Brugge 3
Strasbourg 3
Wengen 3
Mittenwald 4

That still gives you 7 days in the Alps, which might be long time for the kids unless you all like hiking a whole lot.

Thanks everyone. I rarely get this many replies to my posts!

I have been to London for about 2 days when I was 22, Bruges with my wife for two nights, Paris for 3 or 4 days, and the Berner Oberland for 3 nights in Murren. I have also been to other areas in Europe not on my list (Ireland, Italy)

My kids have never been to Europe and I want to give them a little flavor of my fav places and places I want to see more of. That would include London, Paris, Belgium, Bavaria and Germany in general.

Since I know I want to be in Broadstairs at a certain time of year (for the British Open golf championship, I figured we would hit London first before proceeding to the continent. I just wasn't sure if we should stay in the UK for the whole of this trip (I personally want to go to Scotland - top of my travel list) or hit London/Paris and maybe a little of Belgium and/or Burgundy (also high on the list) along the way or head down to the Alps and Bavaria (also near the top of my list). I am leaning toward Option 1 as it will cover a few more countries and regions, different languages, history and topography.

For Americans, it's hard to plan European vacations as we want to see it all, but have so little vacation time (and it's expensive to get the whole family over there). Thanks!

Hi, Little A...
I *LOVE* that you're not trying to see everything in three weeks. May I suggest you do London and Paris (and the Open) and a couple of day trips? I think it would do your kids a world of good to go somewhere where English isn't spoken but the trip might be easier and more enjoyable with just two home bases (London and Paris) where you could rent an apartment. (And if you children are old enough, after they get to know the city, they could even venture out on their own for a couple of hours and have a solid home base). I traveled a lot as a child and I don't remember much of the places we spent a couple of days at but remember vividly the trips we took where we were in the same place for a week and really got to explore the area.

Just my 2 cents.

I think Aramis has given you a good itinerary, if you're leaning toward #1.

But I'd add at least a day to London, preferably 2, and take one away from the Alps. There are tons of kids things to do in London, as you know.

What are your kids interested in seeing most?

LittleA - are you going by car or train? Car i presume but do not neglect the train system - esp if going to large tourist cities where many city centres are off-limits to private vehicles, parking can be problematic and expensive, etc

But you seem to be going away from many big cities but trains can certainly get you to all the places mentioned. One problem with car rental may be that you have to return the car to the country in which you rented it or face a steep drop-off fee often.

But if considering the train then i always spotlight these great info-packed sources to help plan such a trip - and you kids can always travel in a car but in the States rarely by train - trains which blow along at up to nearly 200mph in Germany and France - any check out these sources: www.ricksteves.com; www.seat61.com; www.budgetueropetravel.com - download the latter's free and superb IMO European Planning & Rail Guide for itineraries, etc - even if not going by train.

We went to Europe for three weeks when my kids were 8 & 10, and spent a week in Paris, then two weeks in Italy. We have traveled many places with our kids and usually for 2 - 3 weeks. Based on our experiences, I would choose either #2 or #3 for one main reason - you aren't doing as much moving around. You can rent an apt and spend your time exploring rather than packing and traveling. You can balance kid activities with adult activities without the exhaustion and stress of moving again. And it gives you flexibility when your plans need to be changed (which will happen - weather or other things - will prevent you from doing something you wanted on one day, but you can switch things up and do it tomorrow instead since you will still be in that area).

We are in the process of planning a return to Europe now (my kids will be 13 & 15) and I completely agree - it is hard and you want to try to include everything! I am having a hard time narrowing down all the things we want to include, but keep reminding myself how much better the trip will be if we only choose a few places to base ourselves.

Thinking more about it - w/ the Open being a major reason for your trip and now mentioning Scotland . . .

That is what I'd do--London for about 5 days, the Open, then up to Scotland for the rest. You can see Edinburgh, St Andrews and spend 10-14 days total touring around Scotland.

Paris is amazing OF COURSE, and so are the other places you mention -but for the things you seem to enjoy,IMO you could not improve on London, Broadstairs and Scotland. You can fly into London and home from Glasgow or Edinburgh.

Wengen, Switzerland - 3 nights>

Well for kids that age and adults of any age the Jungfrau Region to me is like an Alpine Disneyland - not in the perjorative sense of the world but the sense that there are so many neat rides on all types of conveyances to do - including up to the Jungfraujoch station, highest in Europe and in a sea of ice - if from a balmy clime you kids may for the first time play in snow - walk thru the long ice tunnels and caves - ride a dog sled, etc.

You may want to stay a week or so in Switzerland - and trains are IMO the best way to go here as Alpine Wunderlands like the Wengen area simply do not allow cars to penetrate its unique tranquility - come in from Strasbourg to Basel on train, rail to Interlaken-Ost and head to the hills. Get say an 8-straight-day Swiss Pass and virtually everthing that moves in terms of public transit in Switzerland will be covered - trains, lake boats - kids will also love hopping the steamers that constantl ply either of the two idyllic lakes bookending Inter-laken; and all buses and trams in cities and gives 50% off aerial cableways and trains to mountain top.
And kids under 16 get a free Family Pass to match whatver pass the adults buy and then they never pay a dime, even to ride up to the Jungfraujoch, which Swiss Passes only give a discount on. The Swiss Family Pass IMO is one of the true travel bargains in Europe and Switzerland is so so exceptional and easy to include say if in nearby Strasbourg that you should strongly consider it - for the kids if not only the adults.

Great advice everyone, we really, really appreciate it! We are from Washington State, so our kids have seen snow many times - we can even see Mt. St. Helens from our house about 25 miles away.

It's a tough choice, we are leaning toward a week London, a week in Bruges/Burgundy if that is possible and a week in Paris. Scotland, Bavaria, Austria, Italy, Spain, India, Thailand, Costa Rica, Argentina, etc. will have to wait for future trips!

That sounds like a wonderful trip! Keep us posted and keep asking questions.

So are you planning to take the ferry from Ramsgate to Ostend and train or taxi to Bruges? How are you going to get from Bruges to Burgundy? If you rent a car for the latter, you will (probably) have to pay a hefty surcharge for dropping it in another country. But you'll probably want the car for Burgundy.

Why Burgundy by the way? Consider Normandy or Brittany instead. Not so far, lots of beach towns, good places for the kids. Of course, your kids are used to ocean beaches. As well as snow-topped mountains.

Another idea is going up to Holland for a few days. It's not far by train; you wouldn't need a car; kid-friendly; easy train to Paris.

Your new plan sounds good, much better... but I'm with Mimar -- I'd skip Burgundy, simply because of logistics and I don't really think of it as a place for kids, as much as I love the area.

I'd do Bruges and maybe Ghent, or even Amsterdam and a smaller town like Delft...or add some time in Brittany/Normandy, as suggested above.

If taking the train from London to Scotland and back then you may want to investigate the BritRailPass - mainly because kids under 16 get a free pass to match what the adults buy - (Family Pass) - then you can hop any train anytime -such fully flexible tickets often cost an arm and a leg and may be more than the pass costs-plus you could use it for day trips out of London or to break up your trip like stopping by the Lake District on the way back or York for a day on the way up.

All of your three options look very reasonable to me. Just chose the one you prefer