cferrb

A few suggestions:

1. Fly into Rome. See Rome, Pompeii, Florence, possibly Lucca, Sienna and/or Pisa. Take the train to Switzerland and see some of Switzerland. Take the train over to Austria, see Salzburg, end up in Vienna and fly home from there.

2. Fly into southern France. See history, art, wine etc. in Southern France, then drive to Spain, where you can see Barcelona, possible Seville/Granada/Cordoba. Get back over to Madrid, explore around Madrid and fly home from there.

3. Fly to London. Spend some time in England. Take a ferry from Portsmouth to Cherbourg, rent a car to see the Normandy Beaches, drive to Paris. Explore Paris, maybe take the train up to Amsterdam or Brugge and fly home from Paris.

Plan the trip so that the kids have some freedom to do their own thing -- take their own walking tours, take their own trips by train to see things that you're not interested in, do shopping where they want to, etc. Your major transportation is planned as a family, but there is plenty of time for you to split up once you are in your major locations.

nytraveler

I would highly reco that you organize your own trip - esp with 2 kids that age. I think theywould be bored stiff on most bus tours, which IMHO sepnd way to much time just sitting and looking out the window, stopping for "shoping" for tschotkes that nobody wants (but the guide gets a cut), earlt group dinners and very early am starts.

We taveled to London and Paris with a 14 and 17 year old - and it was much better fo them to go off and do what they wanted at times than for all of use to be joined at the hip. And that was in a city for a week at a time - not beeing cooped up on a bus.

Doing it yourself is very easy with a little exploration - and with 4 people to divide the planning among it should be easy.

annhig

hi robyn,

we have travelled with our older kids quite a lot and our most successful trips have been when we have stayed in one place for longer rather than dotting about, and in apartments rather than hotels. best of all were our trips to cities like Rome and Venice where we got to know the local cafes, shops and area and began to feel at home, even in a short period of time.

where do THEY want to go? what do THEY like to do? you'll have no fun unless they are happy and involved.

regards, ann

pauljagman

robync - I agree with nytraveler, do some homework and go on an independent trip. Of course there are some travel companies that offer "independent" style of trips.

For example, they may have a 3 or 4 day stay in London followed with a 3 day stay in Paris followed with a 2 day stay in Rome. They arrange the hotels based on your criteria (ie price, type of accomodations) and they further arrange the transportation to or from each city. They often offer assistance in planning day trips or tours in each city.

My family did this type of tour several years ago. We were mostly independent, I arranged day trips at each city by looking online and determining what my family members would enjoy.

It was quite laid back and relaxing and we didn't have the hassle of schleping from one place to another with a group and travel guide. They provided transportation from one city to the next and dropped us off at our hotel.

Hope you have a great trip. You and your family will have memories for a lifetime.

Lauratg

Are you the type of person who likes to plan things? I've taken my kids to Spain, Paris, Greece, Italy and London and I absolutely love the planning stage. However, it is a lot of work to plan a trip. The internet is great, but it takes a lot of time.

I second the apartment idea. My favorite thing to do is rent an apartment in a city and explore out from there. If I had three weeks in Europe I'd spend 5-6 days Paris, a week in London, 5-6 days in Rome and I'd take the sleeper car train between the cities.

If you are more of a "go with the flow" type, I don't think a tour is a bad idea at all.

Good luck-- you will have a lot of fun!

Laura

robync

Zoecat & others:

We can take about 3 weeks starting May 20th, 2010. Since the dad is an engineer, we would enjoy natural and man-made wonders, traveling by train though mountain ranges like in Austria with an itinerary like Rick Steves' "Best of Europe in 21 Days":
Starting in the Netherlands, in 21 days you'll experience the best of Amsterdam, Germany's Rhine Valley and Romantic Road, castles and forests of the German-Austrian Tirol, canals of Venice, Renaissance Florence, the art and history of Rome, seaside villages of the Cinque Terre, the majestic Swiss Alps, France's Burgundy region, and the City of Light — Paris.

We want to spend as little as possible to emulate the above Steves' tour, while not getting stuck on the boring, artificial packaged tour bus you all mention. That is more important than the total price. We would like to spend 2 days per locale and zip between them on modern/fast rail and only fly when arriving and departing 2 different cities in Europe to LAX. perhaps all we need is a really good travel agent who has been to all of the places who can set it all up?

As far as what do the 18 and 20 year olds like? They honestly don't know, or have strong preferences, since we have previously taken them on cruises to Alaska, Hawaii,& Mexico, and we are one big happy family of four when together. We would like to share this one chance now to travel together before they get too involved in their own lives. They have already grown up too fast.

cathies

Hi robync, keep in mind that every time you move cities you will lose at lease 1/2 day. Eg florence to Rome is 1 1/2 hours on the train, but you need to add time to check out of the hotel, get to the train station, wait for the train and then repeat the entire experience when you arrive in Rome.

I know you are happy to have an overview, but I think that tour crams way too much into 3 weeks. I think the tour you have described will mostly be seen through the windows of the coach.

You may also find that after a week or two you are completely fed up with having to be up early in the morning and back on the bus.

nytraveler

Two days per city is way too little to see anything. tours can do that since they make all the arrangements for you and whisk you from place to place with a minimum of actual sightseeing.


I would assume kids that age would want the chance for nightlife with their peers, not having to get up at 7 am every morning after rolling in at 1 am, and some time relaxing in wherever - and learning about the place and the life - not sitting on trains all day.

We found it much better to split up some days so we could each do what we wanted. It gave us much more to talk about at dinner - and let us explore galleries and do some cafe sitting while they did a bunch of teen shopping and went out a couple of nights to local teens cafes and clubs. they enjoyed much more the chance to meet some locals, practice their French and be very sophisticated than they would have rushing around on a train from place to place every couple of days.

(I admit we have done trip in the US the same way - some sections in road trip mode - but then 4 or 5 days in major cities along the way.)

Also, I would think with 4 people a car would be cheaper - never mind give you much more flexibility - than a train.

IMHO in 3 weeks you should do no more than 5 cities - with a day trip from a couple of them. Otherwise you will have little more than a tour of the train stations of europe.

janisj

"<i>with an itinerary like Rick Steves' "Best of Europe in 21 Days": Starting in the Netherlands, in 21 days you'll experience the best of Amsterdam, Germany's Rhine Valley and Romantic Road, castles and forests of the German-Austrian Tirol, canals of Venice, Renaissance Florence, the art and history of Rome, seaside villages of the Cinque Terre, the majestic Swiss Alps, France's Burgundy region, and the City of Light — Paris.</i>"

One really can't re-create the itinerary of any organized tour in the same time frame. You will have to bite the bullet and decide whether you want to go on a whirlwind guided tour where you turn over total control to the bus driver/tour guide - OR - do your own thing.

The reasons those tours can cover so much territory is because 1) you ride in a coach <u>all day long</u> some days; 2) you need to have your luggage in the hall outside your room at 0700 or 0800 every single morning; 3) you have very limited time for meals - especially breakfast and lunch - because you must stick to the schedule; 4) you simply do not 'see' some of the major sites. (The classic is "see the Colosseum" in the tour brochure literally means "See it from the moving coach w/o stopping or getting off the bus")

So -- you'll really have to let go of the idea of seeing all those places in that short a time - unless you do go on a tour. W/ 3 weeks on your own, plan on hitting 1 or 2 countries/regions or possible 3 if they are w/i short travel times of each other. For instance a good 3 week trip could be something like:

Italy (Rome/Venice/Florence and one other region).
Or - Rome and Venice plus a bit of Switzerland.
Or - Paris, one other region in France and the Netherlands
Or - Paris, one other region in France and a bit of Switzerland or Germany
Or - Bavaria, the Rhine, and a couple of other parts of Germany, or a bit Austria, or some of Switzerland

Those sorts of itineraries. Not 6 countries/12-13 cities . . . .

janisj

oh, meant to add - "<i>We would like to spend 2 days per locale and zip between them on modern/fast rail and only fly when arriving and departing 2 different cities in Europe to LAX. perhaps all we need is a really good travel agent who has been to all of the places who can set it all up?</i>"- isn't too realistic.

2 days in Rome -- why bother? (not being mean - being practical). You arrive one morning, check in to the hotel, have 1/2 that day and the next day to see one of the world's most amazing places, and pack and leave the next morning. You can't "see" Rome in less than 4 or 5 days - and that is just for the highlights.

Same for Paris - 2 days won't let you see more than a handful of the major sites and none of the interesting minor-ish ones. Sit in a sidewalk cafe and enjoy the ambiance? Forget it - No time.

Plus - some of those rail journeys would take all day or overnight.

A travel agent is not the answer IMO . . . .

nancicita

Hi robync,

I agree with janisj -- a travel agent isn't the answer.
I know that this your first time to Europe and seeing "everything" is important, but 5 countries is really too much.

You might already be overwhelmed with information already.
Like many posters here, I think it's a better idea to pick a few cities and focus on regions, not countries. I like cferrb's itinerary suggestions (posted on Oct 17, 09 at 04:38 PM), especially #1 (ambitious and do-able just with train and public transit) and #2 (may depend on weather/season and may require car).

I hope you have a wonderful time!

WillTravel

Unless you know you have teenagers/young adults who love to awaken early and love rushing from place to place, both a guided tour and/or a very fast self-guided trip around Europe are a bad idea. (I think a bad idea most often, in my opinion.) My personal preference - if you have three weeks (as you seem to indicate) - maybe pick three great cities and spend a week in each, possibly staying in an apartment.

Although I love Spain and Italy, you will be traveling in summer. So I'm not sure if I would suggest those.

Sample itinerary with this method:
Fly to London.
Stay in London one week. Do one daytrip by train.
Train to Paris.
Stay in Paris one week. Do one daytrip.
Train to Amsterdam.
Stay in Amsterdam 5-7 days. Do two or more daytrips (there are so many great spots outside Amsterdam).
Fly out of Amsterdam, or consider one more journey, such as to Frankfurt or Cologne, with a night or two stopover, before flying home.

Maybe Amsterdam is controversial, but there is a lot more to the city and the region than smoking dope. You'd have to decide if your kids could handle being in Amsterdam responsibly or not. But it's a place I really like visiting in the summer.

annhig

hi robync,

i agree with the others that the 2 days and move on style of trip will prove very frustrating and tiring. as you have never been to europe before, you probably don't realise the problems of getting from A-B, which can exhaust you before you start actually seeing anything.

Based on your stated preferences, I think that you should look for a trip that combines activity and sightseeing in a variety of venues, with no more that 5 bases.

this is the sort of thing I would suggest:

fly into Geneva and make for the Bernese oberland. spend 3 nights in lauterbrunned/wengen.

train to Venice. spend another 3 nights there.

train to Rome - 5 nights [that's 16 so far].

fly to Paris - 3 nights

TGV to Nice - 3 nights.

or do it the other way round.

that way you get mountains, beach, ancient civilisation and art, fabulous cities, AND Venice.

you won't have long enough in any place really go get to know it, but you and the kids will have a taste, but you won't be utterly exhausted.

good luck with the planning,

regards, ann

isabel

I agree with the others that a tour is NOT the way to go because even though it is the only way to see that many places in 3 weeks, you really don't SEE them, you drive past them. It can be very frustrating. The only people I know who have liked them, did so because they actually liked the tour group culture of socializing all day on a bus with a bunch of people - and in most cases older (like over 65) people.

But at the same time I don't agree with most of the posts that say you can only see (well) one or two countries in 3 weeks. There IS a compromise. Two days per city is not quite enough, but you don't need an entire week either.

To mimic the RS tour somewhat you could do this:
Amsterdam (3 nights)
Trier, Germany (2 nights)
Vienna, Austria (3 nights)
Venice, Italy (3 nights)
Florence, Italy (4 nights with day trip)
Provence or Burgundy France (3 nights)
Paris (3 nights)

Alot of people would say that's too rushed but it's mostly 3 night stays which are long enough to get comfortable and not feel you are on the train the whole time. You said you wanted to do trains the whole time. My family of four did a 22 day trip similar to this a few years ago but we drove the whole way. We did Bavaria, Saltzburg, Venice, Umbria, Rome, Tuscany, Cinque Terre, Burgundy, Paris. We included a number of one night stays and didn't feel too rushed, but by train it does take longer.

You do have to give up something, for example, I don't think you could include Venice, Florence, Rome and the CT but two of them would still give you a nice taste of Italy.

janisj

just a bit of follow on from isabel's suggestion.

Her itinerary equals 21 nights. To manage that you'd need 23 days minimum away from home. You'd fly over one night to get to Europe and fly one full day to get home. Also, day one will be a jet lagged fog for at least some of you. So if you have 3 full weeks and no more, you are actually talking about 18 days free for traveling around /seeing the sites.

So isabel's plan is definitely doable -- but you'd probably have to drop one of the destinations. And I personally think 3 nights in Paris is too little - especially since part of the last day will be spent packing and preparing to fly out the next morning.

If your "about 3 weeks" is really only 18-19 days, you'd need to cut out two of her places. If your "about 3 weeks" actually means 23-24 days - then you could manage her plan and add a day or two to Paris.

fun4all4

Welcome to Fodor's robync! As you can see there are lots of opinions here, which is great and you can learn a lot from amazingly experienced travlers who really know their stuff. I never take a trip without researching here. Try not to get overwhelmed, though, as there are many ways to approach a trip and the amount of info here on the internet (Fodors, tour companies, hotels, etc..) is vast. This forum is populated mostly with independent travelers who love to plan and do it ourselves, for the most part. Thus, there is a general bias in that direction - it is good to be aware of that.

Sometimes a tour is the right choice. Really. But, you should understand what you are choosing. Generally there is a lot of bus/train/travel time involved, especially on broad "overview" trips. It is usually necessary to get up EARLY in the morning to get on the road - fine for some, but others (including most 18 and 20 year olds) hate it. It is an ok way to get a "taste" of Europe, but to really soak up the "best" Europe has to offer (opinion), one needs to spend a bit more time in each city or area. I don't agree that one must spend a full week in each city, but 3-4 night stops with some a bit longer and some a bit shorter (the occasional 1 or 2 night stay can work, but too many can be exhausting and use up lots of time that could be spent enjoying a place vs. a bus). For a first time visitor, I do think Rick Steves is a great resource for his travel philosophy such as packing light, traveling "close to the ground," helping with logistics, and such, but I do think he moves a bit fast with too many 1 or 2 night stays. However, if you are attached to his 21 day tour and are discouraged by price, I am not sure you are going to find much lower costs for a quality tour - he is considered to be in the moderate range as far as pricing. Globus also has a number of overview trips and they are a reputable mid-range company as well, but the groups are larger and cost will not be much lower. If you want a tour, you will need to bite the bullet and pay for it. You can probably save some real $ doing it yourself, but remember that unless you rent an apt, 4 people in Europe pretty much always means 2 rooms. And, the more you move around the more expensive it gets. You will save money going with fewer stops and shorter distances.

I also think an agent can be great - for someone who does not have the time or interest in planning a big trip a GOOD agent can help with the logisitics of linking hotels, trains, and such into a nice trip. A GOOD agent would also probably tell you (like the folks here) that trying to move and cover sights at the pace you are considering, especially on your own without a tour, is a bit crazy. With 18 and 20 year olds, it is even crazier - not because they can't keep the pace, they have more energy than most of us, BUT because it is not as fun for them. We have traveled with our 2 sons, now 15 and 18, to Europe on a number of occasions and they really want down time! They like to sleep in some days, have time for a nap, wander on their own to get gelato or a drink, etc... We go to soccer matches or shows or whatever instead of just visiting a big sight or museum - they like that more. I mean, they appreciated seeing the Parthenon and going to Delphi for example, but they also loved playing beach soccer with local kids on Naxos.

If you are interested and willing to take the TIME it takes, then you can really customize a great family trip at a more comfortable (relatively - Europe is expensive for FOUR people)price. A good agent/consultant can also work within a reasonable budget as long as you are upfront with what you want and your expectations match your budget (you will not get a 5* deluxe property in a perfect location with lots of service for a 2* price - but there are some great 2-3* places out there that are simple and clean and fine).

And, if you do want to tackle this on your own - and I really think a tour is not the answer for this trip with kids the ages of yours - the folks here will help. In fact, a number of good suggestions have already been made above...and with more info about your timing, budget and interests (history, city, art museums lovers vs. scenery and hiking types...), we will able to help you fine tune a great trip.

Good luck and happy travels!

enzian

fun4all4 has given you some GREAT advice.

A good place to start planning is by learning to use the rail websites so you can see how long it takes to get from place to place. You might want to add or drop places from your itinerary based on the routes you find.

Two good ones are www.rail.ch (Swiss) and www.bahn.de (German). Both cover schedules for all countries in Eruope, and both are available in English. I think the Swiss one is simpler and more user-friendly.

You'll also need t consider the cost of the train travel. For a plan like yours, a 5-country pass probably is the most cost-effective. These are available in first class only for adults, so you'll have to choose between buying adult passes for your kids, and all sitting in first class, or saving on the kids' passes with a youth fare, and you pay fist class price but sit in second. If you go that route, the four passes will cost you around $2200 for a pass with 8 travel days. To the pass price you'll need to add for supplements, seat reservations, and night trains where you want to use those.

If you are thinking of night trains, keep in mind that they usually bring you into your destination city early in the morning---say between 5:00 am and 9:00 am. Too early to go to your hotel. So you'll have to store your luggage at the train station and go out and see the sights for hours before you can check in.

As for hotels, fun4all4 has correctly advised that accommodation for 4 is expensive. In many European cities it is difficult to find family rooms, so you have to book 2 doubles. Even in 3* hotels, this can add up to $300 or more per night. I just finished planning and booking our family's trip to Italy next summer, and our average cost per night for hotels is 200 euro, or $300. And I only achieved that by booking some apartment stays at $100 a night. (That is why everyone is suggesting that you stay longer in each place so you can use apartments). There are a couple of one-night stops that are going to cost us almost $500.

cferrb

We had no trouble finding hotels that cost less than 150 Euros a night for four people. In some places we had a room for all four of us, and in others we found got two rooms, one for the kids and one for us. We didn't stay in fancy hotels, but they were always clean and safe. They were also not always right in the center of town, but we had a car so that wasn't a huge issue. Apartments were definitely a good deal when we stayed for 5-6 nights in the same city. I spent hours on Venere.com and I used Rick Steves to figure out where to stay.

Do be sure to either have GPS or have maps to all of your lodgings so that you are not looking all over town to find your hotels.

robync

Hi everyone and thank you for the excellent ideas!!! This really is a great forum - everyone is very helpful and knowledgeable!

It looks like our next job will be to hone in on a specific itinerary and prob not attempt to take on too much. You're right, the getting up for a 7a tour every morning can be rough. I also would rather not be on a tour bus for a lot of the tour (I usually fall asleep due to Dramamine!)
I think that our original plan of visiting France, Italy and Spain may work.I hope to have up to 3 wks off from my job.

Btw, since we're hoping to leave towards the end of May thru mid June,is it still feasible to book hotels, air, etc.at this time? Is it necessary to book a year in advance? Also is this a less pricey time of year before summer actually starts?

Since my high school French is very rusty, can one manage in Europe primarily speaking English?

Thanks again!
robyn c

enzian

Those three countries (France, Italy, Spain) would make a very nice trip. You could allot roughly a week to each, or maybe an extra day for Italy and one less for Spain.

You could also see a bit of the alps and the engineering marvels of Swiss trains on your way from France to Italy if you want.

To go from Italy to Spain, you could consider flying from Rome to Barcelona. But the train trip via the Riviera would be lovely. From Genoa to Barcelona is 14 hours by train; breaking it up with a 2-night stop at Nice would give you a chance to explore this area, which is very nice in May (according to my son, anyway).

It is not necessary to book your hotels a year in advance. Some places won't even begin taking reservations for next May until 2010 starts. You might start looking at plane fares now; those may determine your starting and ending points.

You can certainly get by with just English, but it helps to learn a few words in the local language (greetings, yes, no, please and thank you, entrance and exit, open and closed. etc. And I always make a point of learning the word for "forbidden" or "not allowed"!

And you'll be surprised how fast your French comes back once you are there. Start refreshing a bit now, and you'll at least be able to read a lot of it.