We are considering a family trip next year. Our youngest will be 17. There may be 4 or 6 of us. After visiting family in Britain we would like to start our European trip from London going to Paris, visiting Switzerland and Austria (my all-time dream vacation spots including Salzburg Sound of Music Locations and hiking up a Swiss mountain overlooking typical postcard Swiss houses) as well as Florence and perhaps Pisa and Venice. According to what I have found so far, it seems a 10-15 day train pass would be more feasible than train tickets. Any help on costs, things to do, places to stay, specifics of where to visit, etc. would be extremely helpful. Thanks.

IMO, even 15 days is not enough time to visit Paris, Switzerland, Austria, Florence and Venice. I would suggest picking Paris and either Switzerland/Austria OR Florence/Venice.

Train passes are not as economical in Italy, as you still have to pay a reservation charge.

Caroline - the most essential consideration for a trip like this, is how long you have for it.

so far, you've got enough in your itinerary for about a month!

if, as I suspect, you don't have that long, you might like to start trimming to what you really want to do for a 1st trip. London by the sound of it, Switzerland and Austria. if 15 days is all you've got, that will be quite enough.

as for what to do, presumably you already have some idea or you wouldn't have focussed on these places. THe destination guides at the top of this screen will give you some more ideas.

re cost, the more you move the more expensive it gets. stay longer in one place and you can rent an apartment [great with a family] get to know your neighbourhood, buy cheap/er transport passes, etc.

but as I say, before we can really start to help you, we need to know the length of the trip, oh, and when it's going to take place. A winter trip is very different to a summer one.

great minds, ekc...and you forgot london!

This is good advice. You need to carefully plot this out, looking at transportation options, making sure that the percentage of time involved in getting from one place to another is not excessive.

and in re-calculating -- figure that everything takes longer for four and even looooonger for 6. You won't have jet lag to worry about but you still will be trying to heard a group through several cities/countries. Plan on eating between 1/2 and one full day every time you move from one city to the next.

w/ 2 weeks or less think France - or - Italy - or - Switzerland/Austria.

We probably only have 2 weeks max in continental Europe. Any touring we would do in London would be before this. We don't expect to do an indepth visit of these countries but just hit on some major parts. In Paris: Eiffel Tower, Arc de Triomphe, quick Louvre trip (not an indepth one) and we have been told about a very good "haunted house". After that, we would maybe do one place in Switzerland (Zermut? perhaps), Florence, perhaps Venice, Lucerne, Salzburg, then fly home. Thoughts?

Still too much for 10-14 days IMO . . .

No matter what we wish for - sometimes we need to compromise.

Is this your first trip to Europe?

I don't think you will find many experienced travelers whose thoughts would be positive about what you want to do. Sorry.

You have 14 days (possible 13 if Day 14 is your travel home day). Each move you make will use up a minimum of half a day, possibly more depending upon the distance, time tables of transportation, etc. So six moves eliminates at least three more days: you now have 10 - 11 days to see six cities. You can see that this really only gives you at most 1.5 days in each place.

Obviously if rushing from site to site is your style, and you can get all six members of your party up and moving, then you CAN do this trip. But think about whether this is truly the trip you all want. There are so many wonderful places to visit and I know it is very, very difficult to think about missing out on something, but "ticking boxes" for two weeks would not only be absolutely exhausting, but IMO very stressful hoping that everything goes perfectly, because with that little amount of time in each place, it would have to.

One thing to keep in mind for your planning is that family rooms aren't plentiful in major cities like Paris--you'll have to spread out, and that makes moving from hotel to hotel more time-consuming.

Try to prune your itinerary so that you can really enjoy the places you visit.

Train schedules here:

http://reiseauskunft.bahn.de/bin/query.exe/en?

It's Zermatt, by the way.

If it chews up a day to relocate from one place to another and you only stay for a day,
there goes half of your trip. Also the larger the place, the longer you need to stay given the amount of time needed to get oriented.

Kayak and whichbudget are two places to start for budget flights before going on to sites such as expedia and others.

I'm with jj and anamax here - still too much. Adding kids/GPs into the mix always adds to the time taken to do anything too. those major sights in Paris won't take long, but do you really want to spend the money needed to get there just to leave after a day or two?

in 14 days you can still do quite a lot, but you'll need to be disciplined and lose a few places.

here's an idea for others to shoot at: [I'm ignoring the London portion which comes first]

Day 1 - London - Paris by Eurostar. Need to book tickets as soon as they come on sale to get the best prices. Stay 3 nights [absolute minimum IMO]

Day 4 - fly to Salzburg. Base there/Salzkammergut for a week. loads to do including Sound of music places [actually a place nearby called Mondsee],, etc no need to go to Switzerland to see mountains - Austria's got loads of its own.

Day 11 - train to Venice. Stay 3 nights.

Day 14 - fly home.



Day 11 -

There aren't any budget airlines flying DIRECTLY between Paris and Salzburg. I suggest you think about flying to Munich and taking the 1.5 hour train trip from there to Salzburg.

Look, I'm gpoing to teel you what the others haven't: that supposed Sound of Music stuff doesn't really EXIST in Salzburg.

That gazebo I believe has been closed down; the location of the exteriors is Schloss Leopoldscron and is privately owned and not open to the public.

You need to READ YOUR OWN POST.

You talk about Switzerland...SKIP Paris and go there directly; you could then take a train into Italy to Florence and also see Pisa.

I would forget Paris or cut out something else; Salzburg is nice but Paris has more to see and do as does Florence (vs. Pisa).

You really need to do some research on your own. You found THIS site; you can find others for info.

Look, I'm gpoing to teel you what the others haven't: that supposed Sound of Music stuff doesn't really EXIST in Salzburg.>>

no, but it does exist in Mondsee nearby, which is where the wedding scene was filmed. but overall Dukey is right, the sound of Music is NOT a favourite film in Austria though there are tours offered eg this one:

http://www.panoramatours.com/de/salz...music-tour-27/

In terms of hiking Swiss mountains, I can tell you I just had a friend spend 14 days in Switzerland with her family, 2 adults, 3 children ages 12, 10 & 6. Rooms for that many were a bit of a challenge to book but doable and sometimes was 2 rooms. She said hiking in the mountains was a great experience. But...up can be quite steep and this is from someone used to hiking in Colorado. They loved their trip which included Zermattt, Lucerne, Lausane, and Murren.

As others have said, too much and too much moving. Pay attention to the person who iterates how much time you lose each time you go to a new locale—getting there, checking in and checking out of a hotel, etc. I think Annhig has the best use of time—and one that will make your family feel they have really been to Europe and not on a driveby.
If you go to Switzerland proper and want to see those chalets, I think Zermatt is a pretty good choice. But be aware that on any given day the star of that town, the Matterhorn, may be hidden behind a cloud—very disappointing!!

If you go to Switzerland proper and want to see those chalets, I think Zermatt is a pretty good choice. But be aware that on any given day the star of that town, the Matterhorn, may be hidden behind a cloud—very disappointing!!>>

Personally I would avoid Zermatt - it's not that easy to get to. if it has to be Switzerland the Berner Oberland is a lot more accessible and very child-friendly. Wengen for example is more or less traffic-free and there are trains and cable cars for getting you up the mountain so you can walk down.

but to get the most out of going there, IMO you'd need to stay a week or so, which rather rules out Austria.

On the whole, I'd say that Austria is cheaper than Switzerland if that's a consideration. but you'll really save money simply by not trying to see too many places at once.

A highlight of the Salzkammergut is a visit to St Gilgin, an incredibly cute town.

Caroline-
I am going to echo the above opinions.. Slow it down.. We took 4 ppl to Europe in 2007 for about 16 days or so - traveling from the west coast. We went to Paris, Montreux, Florence & Rome. We were 100 percent toast by Rome & came home needing a vacation. We went back in 2008/09 and spent 10 nights in one apartment in Paris (6 ppl that time) ... Way better experience. While it is tempting to do/see as much as possible, you may enjoy yourselves more if you slow it down a bit.
We are going to Spain for two weeks and will 4 times but hopefully it will be okay...

So far I haven't got much practical info about this trip except for many saying that we have chosen too much. We are seasoned travellers but not in Europe. We do NOT want to go to just one place. In fact, my son wants to add Rome. If we do that, one of the other Italian spots will have to go! I could do without Paris but my husband and others couldn't. If I had to chose between Switzerland and Austria, Austria would go. What about specific places to stay? Specific mountain climbs? Favorite places in Switzerland? Opinions as to cost of train tickets vs. train pass, etc. I do plenty of research myself btw but on this site I am looking for your thoughts.