I usually travel for two or three weeks at a time, but I am considering 4 nights in a European city (one I've never been to) this winter. I will be flying from the east coast of the US. Seeking honest opinions based on experience - is it worth it? On one hand it would be a great indulgent escape. Days are shorter and it will be bitter cold, so I'll move around faster without lingering at outdoor cafes, parks, etc. So maybe 4 nights in the winter is equal to more nights in warmer weather? On the other hand, will I feel like I am going home as soon as I get there? Is the expense, planning and jet lag worth it for such a short trip?

Four days in winter will seem like two days in lighter seasons because thre's so little daylihgt and so little time to see things.<BR><BR>day 1 fly<BR>day 2 jet lag<BR>day 3 enjoy<BR>day 4 rush then fly home

I think you're cutting it too short, xxx. The original x above has said &quot;FOUR NIGHTS&quot; in a European city, not four days total -- major difference. I think you should be able to avoid the bulk of the jet lag the first day (assuming you're arriving in the morning?) and it still gives you three full days there. Go and enjoy. But obviously this plan works best for cities where the daylight hours aren't so meaningful as in the country.<BR><BR>I keep getting those special emails from American Airlines about last minute specials -- fly to Paris for the weekend for something like $179 round trip, and I get more and more tempted. Especially if I can get four nights there out of it. And how much planning to do really need to do for such a short stay? One hotel, the flight, and just go and improvise!!!

I'd definitely go for it. But, unlike Patrick, I think that the shorter the stay, the MORE planning you need to do. If I'm staying somewhere for a week or more, then I feel I can afford to just take my time and make my own discoveries as the mood takes me, but if I'm on a tight schedule then I like to have a good idea of what I want to see and do and know where and how to find it, rather than just wandering around aimlessly, hoping I'll stumble across something of interest.

Good point, Xenos. I guess I was picturing myself in x's shoes, and thinking about a four day jaunt to someplace I've been a lot -- like London or Paris, where I'd be happy revisiting my favorite places and just soaking up some European atmosphere. I forgot x mentioned &quot;one I've never been to&quot;. And therefore you are right. I too would want to make the most of my time, which does take some planning.

I'd definitely do a quick getaway to a city that I'd been to before. Or if it was a first time, then I'd consider London or Paris (both easy cities for a first timer). However as you've previously been to Europe, then I'm guessing you've already been to London &amp; Paris; and as you've already said you're looking to visit a city that you've not been to, then MAYBE I'd do a short getaway. Agree that planning is critical, almost even more important when doing a quick trip. One thing you should consider is the current weather conditions; as per article on CNN, <BR>http://www.cnn.com/2003/WEATHER/01/04/europe.floods.reut/index.html<BR>there's been ALOT of rain in certain parts of Europe, with Germany in particular experiencing floods.<BR>

Patrick,<BR><BR>Yes that's what I meant. I'd be quite happy to just &quot;wing it&quot; too if I was going somewhere I already knew and loved, just for the sake of being there!<BR><BR>I think for a short, first time visit, I'd go somewhere fairly small and intimate, where it's easy to get around - Amsterdam springs to mind.

4 days? <BR>Seems to me the payoff days/total days ratio is too small for the expense involved. The airfare is close to a fixed cost regardless of the number of days, although it might be substantially cheaper in the winter.<BR><BR>But 4 nights costs you 6 days. The ratio is 2:3. I would want it more like 5:6 or 6:7 before I spent the money, and paid with jet lag as well, to fly over and back in that short a time frame.<BR><BR>I think a better value for the time and money expended could be achieved by extending the stay a few days.<BR><BR>I would consider a trip to New York instead. There is plenty to do there.<BR>

Interesting responses, all of them, thanks!<BR>About planning, I had to laugh : ) I am an obsessive planner and regardless of the length of the trip I'll be spending zillions of hours on the internet researching hotels, etc. Yes, I'd like to go someplace I've never been before, so it will require a lot of planning and logistics to make sure I see everything I want to see. Thanks again, your responses give me some good things to think about!

I've read here more than once people describing Amsterdam as &quot;small &amp; intimate&quot;. I don't understand that notion (unless you think A'dam is only the historic canal area). It's a large, multilayered, diverse metro area. Places I might say are &quot;small &amp; intimate&quot; are Brugges, Haarlem, Delft or Leiden - but not Amsterdam.

We did a 4-night jaunt to London in winter a couple of years ago and it was fabulous. However, what motivated us was a $99 each-way fare. Even then, because it was London, it wasn't an inexpensive trip. I would do another such trip, but only if I got an incredible deal on airfare.