janisj

or -- Book business class seats both ways with compete lie flat beds and individual 'compartments' so there is no issue with the knees. Would free up almost 2 full weeks. Still not enough time to hit all your original 15-ish major cities but would allow you to see a lot more with a LOT less dashing around. Say fly into Rome, visit Florence and Venice and maybe Naples/the Amalfi Coast. Fly to Paris and visit maybe the DDay beaches/Normandy and/or someplace in the south of France. Train to London where you can spend time in London and also visit other places like York, or Edinburgh or Bath staying a couple of nights. All are easy train rides from London

This isn't meant as an actual itinerary but just an example of what you could do with a little more time on the ground to play with.

KTtravel

Great suggestions from mjs and janis. Unless you've always wanted to also take such a cruise, I would put that money towards Business class tickets and allow a little more time for your big trip. If you don't want to be in Europe more than three weeks, you will need to trim your wish list significantly.

neckervd

You might also take the cruise ferry from Barcelona to Civitavecchia (port of Rome).
The overnigjht train (with sleeping cars) from Venice to Paris may run again next year.

shelemm

With 24 hotel nights, I would select a maximum of 6 destinations, an average of 4 nights in each place, but I would not do less than 3 nights anywhere. Plus I would mostly fly or you'll be spending all your days on trains or buses. And it's not like the train routes are so beautiful. A 60- 90 minute flight, is better than a 7 hour train ride.

So if Barcelona and London are two of your destinations, pick another four. I would pick Rome, Venice, Vienna, and Prague. That would be an awesome trip of discovery and eye-popping beauty. Plus not having to run around so much.

janisj

I like shelemn's suggestions -- I might add Paris since it is such an amazing city. I wouldn't try to squeeze in an additional city though. This is assuming you keep with the TA cruise disembarking at Barcelona -- I'd skip Barcelona. Now of course you will be there but you won't be suffering with jet lag so I'd fly straight to my first destination - Prague or Vienna or a city in Italy or wherever. Then after visiting those cities fly to Paris for a few days, then take the train to London. Then either fly home or proceed with the cruise from Southampton.

StuDudley

""This is assuming you keep with the TA cruise disembarking at Barcelona -- I'd skip Barcelona.""

Why skip Barcelona if the OP already has to be there? IMO, it is a lot more interesting than Vienna, Monaco, Genoa, Milan, Geneva, and Zurich. Vienna & Prague on Shellmm's list are difficult & time consuming to get to. KTtravel's itinerary seems fine with me. All very convenient for train travel within Italy, & only 2 flights.

Stu Dudley

StuDudley

Venice & Florence have been mentioned. Here is a link to my wife's Shutterfly books that cover these two destinations - plus a few more.

We have Barcelona also, but Shutterfly made changes to their "Share" function recently and I can no longer share them on Fodors.

Italy - Tuscany & Venice. Stu Dudley's Shutterfly book

Stu Dudley

Jean

The OP's list was Italy-heavy and didn't mention Vienna or Prague. I think only the OP can decide what's most important and what will be skipped... based on all factors (logistics, time, stamina).

shelemm

Vienna and Prague are not at all difficult to fly to. Very short flights. Venice to Vienna to Prague. Even though the OP didn't mention them, I mention them because I think it would give the OP very dramatic changes of scenery. If you want one trip to 'see Europe,' I would include them.

kja

Your original wishlist includes some wonderful places! You seem to have taken to heart the advice to choose a more limited set of destinations. (You certainly don't need to consider any additional locations!)

IMO, we need a bit more information to help you narrow down your options. Most importantly, what are your interests? Art, architecture, history? Foods and wines? Shopping? What appeals to you most about the places you originally listed? Would you be happy if you "just" see iconic sights from outside, even if on a rather drive-by kind of itinerary, or do you want to make sure you have time to roam through museums, notice details of church interiors, and stop at cafes for people watching? No right or wrong answers -- just different preferences. And its OK to want a mix, too!

I think Travel_Nerd gave you some great advice upthread (post #10) -- she suggested some ways to help you trim your wish list.

I think if you help us understand your goals for this once-in-a-lifetime trip, we will be better able to help you plan it. There is one thing I can say with certainty: You will see some awesome things no matter what you choose!

mjs

A few more comments. I do not know the status of your husband's knees but business class both ways where one can lie flat might be as Janisj suggests acceptable to your husband. The issue with this of course is cost. Doing so could add two weeks to your time in Europe. The longer trip would allow you to experience much more of Europe. Again however extra time in Europe comes with more cost. I should also mention that European cities are best explored on foot. It is not unusual for me to walk 20 to 30,000 steps in a day. I suspect that is not possible for you. You should therefore cut down your destinations and spend more time in the cities you may want to visit. You might want to consider an apartment or an apartment hotel. Normally I would recommend hotels for someone like yourself but you could save a lot of money eating in instead of going to restaurants all the time. Having a washer/dryer available would be quite handy. You should pack light as you will need to carry your suitcases in and out of train stations and airports and be able to lift them for storage on trains. Lastly if you do have this extra time you may want to visit some of the countryside of Europe, possibly with one day bus tours. I suspect you do not wish to drive.

Sue_xx_yy

1. If your husband has bad knees, I am not sure that places like the Cinque Terre are going to work, mainly because of the hillside locations - you have to walk down and back up to the train station in most cases.

2. Perhaps you could specify in greater detail the range of your husband's mobility. How many hours walking can he do in a day?
And, I trust you will both be 'packing light' - i.e. a carryon bag each plus a backpack for day use.

Consider how long you want to travel by train on any given day. For example, Barcelona to Nice is a 9 to 13 hour trip, with changes. That means - getting luggage, clambering off train, finding the right platform in time to catch the next train at each change.

3. Crowds. How will he be at standing in line (Places like the Vatican Museum in Rome are, alas, much busier than they used to be. Be prepared to see the sites of Rome with a great many of your closest friends. Venice in the spring will also be very busy. Lots of crowds trying to navigate the same narrow cobblestone lined streets.

On the other hand, there are lots of beautiful churches in Rome besides St. Peter's. Point being, try to find things to do that won't involve a lot of shuffling through lines. While we're on the subject of Italy, are you interested in Pompeii? The Amalfi Coast? You can take a day tour to these places from Rome, but note it will be a long day, you'd want to rest the day before and after.

4. I'd still try to keep Switzerland in the mix - lot of gorgeous scenery to be seen from the comfort of a train.
In fact, I'd try to build some version of the classic "Rome to Paris/London" route, some of Italy, Switzerland, France, followed by England (London and Portsmouth/Southhampton.)

Consider by the way that Portsmouth is not far from Southhampton and offers a great view of the seafaring history of Britain.

5 The day tours I mention are not especially cheap but I can't see you wanting to drive much less use local bus transportation. We used the local buses but when we were a lot younger than you are now. Consider spreading your budget a bit more thickly on fewer days rather than more days.

6. In brief, try to get your priorities and restrictions down before coming up with an itinerary. You'll get lots of help here but only you know 'you'. Best of luck.

StuDudley

Despite all the research & work respondents have gone through, and the "workable" solutions & suggestions we all have provided - the OP has not posted anything to this thread in the past 9 days.

Again....... "man hears what he want's to hear, and disregards the rest"
The Boxer
by Paul Simon.

Save your energy!!

Stu Dudley

SusanP

Stu, I was thinking the same thing. Sometimes people just don't want to hear that their plans are unrealistic. I hope the OP will realize that we're only trying to point out the error of their ways to give them a great trip.

Jean

In the end, it's their trip. I've learned that a "great" trip is often defined differently by other people.

Good luck to them on their one and only trip to Europe.

StuDudley

My first trip was horrible because we spent too much time in the car seeing nothing, and too little time "being there". Unless one enjoys airports, being in a airplane seeing nothing, train stations, being on a train & not having the ability to pass a village/site that seems interesting and get out & explore - I feel that the OP's "only trip to Europe" will be like my first trip.

Stu Dudley

Jean

And my SIL loves guided tours that decide what you're going to see, stay in character-less hotels, often eat at marginal restaurants, involve lots of bus rides, early starts, etc. Different strokes...

SusanP

Of course different people have a different idea of a great trip. My concern with this proposed list of places in the time available is that it seems it might be physically impossible. If the gentleman can't take a flight because it's hard on his knees, how much walking can he comfortably do? How easily can he get on and off trains? I do hope they enjoy the trip.

Sue_xx_yy

Stu you are right of course, but sometimes we gain insights even if the OP does not. I learned a few things just from contemplating this puzzle.

I take Jean's point, it is the OP's trip, but aside from the pace of the landside trip, the transatlantic portion is made a lot more complicated by the restriction to cruising being the mode of choice for crossing the Atlantic. I have no doubt it is more comfortable to relax in a stateroom than an economy airline seat, but the fact remains there are far fewer choices of transatlantic sailings than there are transatlantic flights. Matching cruise sail dates to specific desired travel dates won't be a simple matter, plus, as others noted, the choice of gateways is far fewer by sea than by air.

And, as I noted, if one is reluctant to spend 6 hours in an economy air seat, I am not sure how realistic it is to plan a pan European trip.

Rick Steves sells a 'Best of Europe in 21 days' tour that even his website warns is 'one of their most active tours, with 2 to 8 miles of walking per day, hilly areas and stairs' and 9 days with bus rides of 4 to 6 hours duration.

The RS tour doesn't include London and only includes 2 nights in Paris and in each of several other cities. With only 5 more nights available, it would be a stretch to add London even at a fast pace. So even in the context of a commercial tour, with someone else doing the driving, no need to manage train changes (or book the trains or for that matter the hotels) and less need to handle luggage, it would be a lot for a couple of average age 75 with less than great knees trying to match that pace on their own.

SusanP

Just as a side note, I believe I read that travellers on Rick Steves' tours do handle their own luggage.