I’m hoping for advice on a proposed itinerary for four adults traveling to Europe for the first time. We will be departing 09/04/20 and returning 09/25/20, so a total of 21 nights, starting in London, then on to Paris, Venice and Rome. I’m hoping some of you seasoned European travelers can help me reality check this before we lock ourselves into tickets.

We do plan to purchase as many tickets as possible, as far in advance as possible, unless there is a legitimate reason I’m unaware of not to do so. Having checked flights for the period, it appears that the most economical option is to fly in and out of London, as there are non-stop flights both ways at $300 pp less than flying in to London and out of Rome. Even factoring in the cost of a flight from Rome to London (and the loss of half a day traveling) saving $200 pp for other trip expenses seems like a no-brainer.

I’ve scoured many itinerary planning posts and this is what we’re thinking:
Day 1 - Overnight flight to London – arrive 9am on Day 2
Day 2-7 – Six nights in London (possible day trips to Cambridge and Windsor)
Day 8 – 10am Train to Paris – arrive 1pm on Day 8
Day 9-12 – Five nights in Paris (day trip to Versailles)
Day 13 – Overnight train to Venice – arrive 10am on Day 14
Day 14-15 – Two nights in Venice (day trip to Murano)
Day 16 – 10am Train to Rome – arrive 3pm on Day 16
Day 17-20 – Five nights in Rome
Day 21 – 11am flight to London – arrive 1pm on Day 21
Day 22 – Fly home

I realize the time we’re allowing may only afford us hiting the highlights, but frankly, I am most interested in the architecture and history of these destinations. We’re planning to hit one or two “big” attractions most days – think Buckingham Palace, Eiffel Tower, Doge’s Palace, and Colosseum – but what we’re most looking forward to is wandering the streets, seeing the architecture and soaking up the history and character.

Thanks in advance for your input. I appreciate any insight into our planned itinerary and secondarily, any “must sees” or cautions you’d recommend for the dates of our trip.

I think this sounds like a very workable plan to hit the highlights. You have given this thoughtful consideration. I like that you are returning to London a day before you need to fly out. I don't know if you like Rick Steves' guidebooks but I find them useful, particularly for a first visit when you want to see the highlights. He included walking tours of most of the big cities which you may enjoy.

Enjoy your planning and have a wonderful trip!

If you fly out on 9/4 and arrive 9/5, you have 20 nights, not 21. Looks like a good plan, although lots of people don't recommend night trains. I haven't done one, so can't really say.

As someone who is very much on a budget, I still would fly home from Rome. Even if you don't consider the wasted time getting back to London, I don't think it's worth the savings. And when figuring the cost of going back to London, you have more than the flight. It will cost you something to get from the hotel to the airport in Rome and from the airport to the hotel in London.

A few quick comments:

• I you 'must' fly in/out of London (which is likely a false economy) - I would not split my London nights. Immediately upon landing in London, fly on to Rome (or Venice). That travel day is lost to jet lag anyway so just press on and get to your farthest destination. Then 'do' Italy, on to Paris, train to London and have a full week in London without extra checking in/out/travel.

• Consider Oxford over Cambridge as a day trip - but either is fine

• Unless you mean booking a tour of Buckingham Palace, it is just a 'walk by'.

Now about roundtrip vs open jaw. Unless there is a major savings open jaw is generally much better. Me personally -- I think a totally wasted travel day is worse that a net savings of $200 or $300 plus extra hassle.

I also find it a false economy to return to London for just one night to fly home. While it may seem cheaper in dollars spent, for my last two days to be about relocating just for the flight home is valuable vacation time spent unpleasantly--checking in and out of an extra hotel, making all the extra connections.

One way to avoid this is to put all your time in London at the end of your trip. Chances are you could not check in to a hotel room in London until the afternoon and you may be a bit jet lagged. Therefore, upon arrival in London, use that first morning to travel to Paris by train or Rome by air. Then make your trip Paris-Venice-Rome-London or Rome- Venice-Paris-London. This also saves a hotel change.

Janisj and I were typing at the same time and had similar ideas.

With just two days in Venice, I would skip Murano. There is much to do in the main islands, but if you feel the need to explore further, Burano might be the better choice for you because of its colorful buildings.

Thanks so much Thanks so much KTtravel for the feedback and recommendation. I've watched Rick Steves' show, but have never looked at any of his guidebooks. I'll definitely check those out!

Thanks SusanP, janisj and ellenem on the feedback regarding the return trip to London. I was mainly putting London at the front of my trip because it's the least expensive flight in, the city I'm actually most excited about and concerns about weather being colder there the further into September I pushed it. In retrospect, I don't know how much of a real difference two weeks would make in the weather. Any thoughts on that? Oddly, I hadn't really considered reversing the direction of the trip altogether - that's something I'll definitely take a look at. Oxford v Cambridge was kind of a tossup, so I appreciate the vote for Oxford!


• Consider Oxford over Cambridge as a day trip - but either is fine

>> concerns about weather being colder there the further into September I pushed it.<<

London Weather is 100% totally changeable. Reversing the order could get you much better weather, or much worse weather, or absolutely identical weather. Don't let a couple of weeks play any part in your decision

We've been to both Oxford and Cambridge, and both are wonderful places to visit! If you choose Oxford, you could go to Stonehenge and Bath "on the way" (too much for one day). On the other hand, Cambridge is only a 45-minute train ride from London.

And if you go to Cambridge and run out of things to see - highly unlikely - there is a truly wonderful cathedral at Ely, just a bit further by train.

One reason to fly home from Rome rather than London is the high additional (environmental) tax for flying out of London.

If you follow the advice to push on from London upon arrival and save London for the end of you trip, spend the extra night in Venice. Either way, if it were my trip, I would spend five nights in London and add any extra nights to Venice, allowing you to enjoy time wandering the quieter neighborhoods away from the highly traveled areas.