First Trip to London, how many days in the city is a good standard?
 

We are a family of four considering our visit European trip to London next summer, probably June.

I was thinking of going for six nights, assuming we will probably use much of the first day to get over jet lag, that leaves us with about 4 full days in the city.

Thought about doing a day trip elsewhere if that is a reasonable idea. Totally open to any suggestions, two 50 something adults and two daughters ages of 21 and 19.

We can extend the trip 2 or 3 days if the suggestions say we should, just trying to get an idea what seems reasonable.

Thanks!

Extend, extend, extend :)

Your biggest expense will be the airfare, so the more days you can wring out of it, the better. I don't think you'll run out of things to do if you add 3 more days to your trip - or more if you can spare it. After all, you could spend several weeks in the British Museum alone!

Day trips to Bath and Canterbury and Windsor and Hampton Court are easy, and don't forget that when you're at Waterloo station (by the Eye), you're less than three hours from <b>Paris</b>!

I agree. If you are going, plan to spend at least 10 days and spend 5 or 6 in London and another 5 in the English countryside or in Paris. Getting there is a major cost so see as much as you can while you're there.

I agree with the others. We have been to London several times and our last visit in 2003 was a week long (two days for travel) and those five days were gone before we knew it. We managed to see a few things for the first time and return to a couple of favorite places, but we wanted to return to the British Museum and time didn't allow. There is so much to see and do, stay as long as you possibly can. There always seems to be at least one place we wanted to visit that we never got to.

for such a short trip I don't recommend any day trips. Well Hampton Court Palace, or Windsor, or Greenwich would be OK - but they are in, or practically in, London.

London is HUGE with hundreds of things to interest any family.

For a first trip - 6 or 7 days IN London gives a good basic overview. If you can manage 10 days then you could rent a flat in London for a week and tour around a small bit of the countryside for 3 days, staying in B&amp;Bs.

We should have Marriott points to cover hotels while in Europe. Someone mentioned being near the Eye? Whatever that is? Is there a Marriott near there that would be a good location to stay and then spend a few days in Paris -- sounds like a wonderful thing to do, maybe 6 days in London and 4 in Paris?

I was thinking of 3 London, 4 Paris and 3 more London to round out the trip, before flying back.

I have been to London over 15 times - and thre is always something new to see. For a first timer - and assuming a reasonable level of interest in the basic sights and museums I would think 5 days in the city is a basic minimum, if you want to do any day trips I would extend that to 7.

(If you're not a city person and hate museums you may be happy with 2/3 days in London - but I think 2 daughters that age would want to stay as long as possible to explore the shopping and nightlife - remember they're both fully adults there - as well as the sights.)

London... let's see... Buckingham Palace with the changing of the guard and tour of the palace - half day; National Galleries in Trafalgar Square - min. 1.5 or 2 hours; Westminster Abbey - 1 hr; Victoria &amp; Albert Museum - min. 2-3 hrs; British Museum - lose track of the time passing; Natural History Museum - min. 2 hrs.; Tower of London - min. half day; Hampton Court Palace - almost full day (incl.transportation); Windsor Castle - almost full day (incl. transportation); Hyde Park; Kensington Gardens and Kensington Palace (half day); Sherlock Holmes (30 mins-1hr); Royal Observatory at Greenwich - min. half day; Tate Britain - 2 hrs.; St. Paul's Cathedral - 1-2 hrs.; Dickens House (30 mins - 1hr); London Eye - 1 hr; Imperial War Museum - 1-2 hrs; Banqueting Hall and Queen's Guard - 1 hr.; cruise on the Thames - 1 hr; Dali Museum - 1 hr.; Somerset House - 2 hrs.; letting yourselves walk aimlesssly through the city to discover new sights and lose yourselves in the crowds every now and then - a few hours; looking for that special restaurant you've been told of by someone - 2 hrs; Walk on the Tower Bridge and other bridges, walk by the Westminster (Houses of Parliament) and Big Ben and linger around; day trips to either Stonehenge, Leeds Castle (in Kent), or Oxford-Stratford-Warwick Castle, or Bath-Cotswolds, or any other option that you may come across...

So get as many days as possible for London.

Google <b>&quot;london eye&quot;</b> (include the quotes).

I agree with the folks who say extend! You will absolutely not exhaust London in six days!

4khansen, Extend if you can. We spent 8 days/nites in London. We spent one of those days in Greenwich and one on a full day tour to Stonehenge, Bath and Windsor. We ran around like crazy the other days because there is so much to do. Go for as long as you can, you won't be sorry and definitely not bored. The only good thing about not going for long enough is that I have a great excuse to go back and see the things I missed. Barb

Googling London Eye would give you much more info than you'd need.

The County Hall Marriott is one of the best located hotels in London -- view-wise. It is directly next door to the Eye and directly across the river from Big Ben. Amazing views from most rooms.

Your idea of 3 london / 4 Paris / 3 London isn't very practical. Each time you move from one city to another, check out/check in, you lose about half a day. So to artifically add travel days for no good reason doesn't make a lot of sense.

If Paris is on your radar - then fly open jaw into London for 6 or 7 days, take the train to Paris (Waterloo station is walking distance from the Marriott), and fly home from Paris after 4 or 5 days.

That is the most efficient use of your limited time.

...unless you travel during what is normally &quot;down time&quot; - in the evening - and then you don't notice it at all.

If you can fly into one city and out of the other for the same price as a round-trip from either, then absolutely go for it. But since the cheapest Eurostar tickets tend to be round trips of which you throw away the return coupon, it might make more sense to go back to London - if only to get on the plane.

<i>it might make more sense to go back to London - if only to get on the plane.</i>

Since there is no easy or painless way to get from Waterloo to LHR, that really doesn't make much sense. It would be <b>much</b> easier to simply fly out of CDG.

Simpler, yes.

But what if you could make $100 for each of four people by doing it? How about $200? See what I mean?

I think how long you stay probably depends on what things you like to do. If you are just counting on seeing the tourist things and taking in a show or two here is my suggestion.

Plan on about 10 days on the ground plus travel days. Split the time between London and Paris with a chunnel connection between the two. For first timers that will be just enough time to really whet your appetite for your next trip.

Get a good guide book for each city. I like Rick Steves London and Paris for overviews but there are many others. Make a list of must-sees and must-dos in each city and see if you have time left over.

For day trips I agree that Windsor, Hampton Court, Greenwich and Versailles aren't really day trips. If you want to take a break from the constant sight-seeing routine you could take one of the day-long bus trips to the Cotswolds, Bath, Oxford or to Chartres.

If you are already spending the money on the airfare and your hotels are covered by Marriott points you could have a pretty grand trip for not a lot of money... at least not a lot more money.

The expense will come when you catch the travel bug and have to return to Europe every year from now on... like a lot of us here.