I'm not totally sure that you can't still take advantage of Lufthansa's non-stop flights between Seattle and Frankfurt AND fly open jaws.

Lufthansa is our preferred airline to Europe, for the same reason you have about the nonstop flight. We love being able to take an evening flight, and fly all the way to Europe. From Frankfurt, we can connect virtually anywhere that we want to go: Amsterdam, Budapest, Barcelona, Prague, Paris, Madrid, Rome, Bologna, Venice and I'm sure a couple more that I can't remember. The "short-hop" flights are either on Lufthansa or one of its small partner carriers.

Unlike using a low-cost carrier & a separate booking, if you book both inbound and outbound legs through Lufthansa, you're protected in case the Lufthansa flight is late and you miss the connecting flight; because it's the same booking, Lufthansa is obligated to get you to your final destination. Not the case if you book your onward flight separately.

Because we are (again) thinking of flying non-stop in/out of Amsterdam, we then thought we'd get a cheap flight to Munich where we'd go to Octoberfest and then rent a car to travel to Austria and Switzerland and take a quick flight back to Amsterdam before returning to Seattle. Might solve several of our time/routing issues while still seeing as much as possible.

Train mavens will know better than I do, but I would have thought there are trains out of Munich and throughout Switzerland that would eliminate the need for a car, coming closer to the desire to make this more of a train trip. If the point of the trip is the fun of driving mountain roads, then of course you want to rent a car. If the point is to see as much as possible, including some cities, being behind the wheel of a car and driving into city centers means the driver sees less of the scenery and more travel is consumed in traffic and finding parking as compared with trains.

Is italy now out of the trip? I'm not pushing it. You've got plenty already. You just didn't mention it in your last post.

We want to train as much as is possible, and Northern Italy is absolutely still on the itinerary! So sorry that I'm flipping back and forth in response to various responses. This is what we're thinking now: Fly in/out of Amsterdam. Thinking we'll then fly to Munich for Octoberfest. Then want to travel to Austria, Switzerland and Northern Italy (Piemonte/Dolomites) via train or car, before then flying (?) back to Amsterdam for the return home to Seattle.

It is possible that putting Switzerland at the end of your trip before flying back to Amsterdam is the most efficient. But I'm not clear what in particular you want to see in Austria or Switzerland.

You could also take an overnight train from Switzerland to Amsterdam - save a hotel cost and if you had a railpass would be cost efficient as well.

Something needs to go---not enough time.
It seems that Piemonte is the outlier to drop. I would get my car as you leave Munich, go to the Salzburg area for 3 days, then down to the Dolomites, and then back to Munich to drop the car.

a car in Switzerland is for most a poor choice IF they go to where most tourists go - the Alps and Wunderbar places like the Berner Oberland or Jungfrau Region where cars are not allowed into many of the preferred resort towns and must be parked outside of town - sometimes like in Wengen and Murren miles away at steep fees. For most in Switzerland the train is the way to go and then other conveyances once there.

Gal, i've been reading through this thread with interest, and have to say I agree with bob - something's got to give.

you still don't seem to have an idea of what you REALLY want to do, so going back to your original plan, what of amsterdam, germany, austria and switzerland culled you live without seeing THIS TRIP?

after all, europe isn't going anywhere. you have in effect two trips - which one do you want to do this time? if you want the train, Pal's plan is a good one - he knows about trains, if nothing else [just joshing you, Pal, now CW's not with us any more]. if you fancy more driving, [and i think that will be essential if you want to see Piedmonte or the Dolomites] then Bob has the right ideas.

but please remember the old travel mantra - less is more.

in 16 days, you can't do it all.

less is more is a mantra for many various things even though more is best usually - they say the only thing males brag about being small these days are their mobile phones.

But in 16 days I think 4 different bases would be all I would want and I like to move fast.

Coming and going you basically lose a day so if it's two weeks maybe a week here and a week there with the two places being rather close together - take trains north of the Alps and then drive south of them perhaps.

well, we certainly agree about one thing, Pal.

by that i mean that 4 bases are enough in 16 days, that's all!

Personally, I hate "bases." It ends up feeling like suburban commuting, not a travel adventure.

I love bases because in a good base there are numerous nice short day trips to take by train, bus or boat - usually an hour or so away - yes a commute if you like it but IMO the commute may be as interesting as the destination - what you see en route just as interesting as what is there.

And I hate packing up and unpacking - things that take most people hours, literally.

And on day trips I need take no luggage, just a small day pack - so nice taking trains sans luggage! Get to the city just hop off the train and on my way sightseeing.

Plus I like returning to a place at night that I know really well - kind of like coming home rather than returning to a strange place every night.

Yes, I've always assumed that's why other people like bases. But a hotel room never feels like home to me anyway. It feels like a hotel room. The only time I rent apartments is when I'm staying in a big city for a week, or out someplace very rural, like the Isle of Skye, where all I am going to be doing is taking long hikes everyday.

I see the same things from the train window that day-trippers do. I'm just not seeing it twice!

I never unpack when I'm on the road. I live out of my suitcase. I pack light so it won't be a problem, but it's also true that where I live in Italy, I don't keep a car, so I'm accustomed to getting on trains and buses hauling stuff. Backpacks are great.

I also feel that it Italy in particular, "base" travel doesn't work very well because of the afternoon pausa. I find it better to be in place after 4pm and spend the night, and get up and do a little more sightseeing in the morning before leaving than to stay in a "base" and try and arrive in another town before noon and see every thing interesting before it all shuts down for 4 hours, and you've got a train to catch by five if you want to get back and wash up before dinner.

Well in Italy day tripping is some hassle like zeppole says - especially if you want to see the local churches that may close from noon to 3 or so and other sights as well - does kind of throw a monkey into the wrench.

Well in Italy day tripping is some hassle like zeppole says - especially if you want to see the local churches that may close from noon to 3 or so and other sights as well - does kind of throw a monkey into the wrench.>>

but not so difficult to avoid with a bit of planning - early start with drive to destination 1, tour sights, [usually open till 1pm IME] have lunch. after lunch, drive to destination 2, by which time things should be opening again and it'll be a bit cooler, tour sights, drive back to base, have dinner, go to bed.

of course this doesn't always work, but it's a reasonable rule of thumb.

Thanks so much, everyone! What a wealth of thoughtful information and tips...we are truly grateful. We'll sit down this weekend with a glass of wine, a big map, a list of what we want to see, train schedules and the internet nearby. I need to book the frequent-flyer-miles tickets very soon, and will report back if we have more specific questions. Happy travels to you all! ♥

and actually it is kind of neat (referring to annhig's comments above) to explore these sleepy towns during the time when most things are closed and only mad dogs and Englishmen (or women) dare go out - driving I found was really much nicer between hill towns during the noon to 3 or 3:30 break - sinuous roads that can get tedious you have all to yourselves.

Happy travels Gal_in_Edmonds,

annhig and PalenQ,

The key points in your posts are "early start" and "explore these sleepy towns during the time when most things are closed." But many people who vacation in Italy are, in fact, vacationing. They are working people who are looking forward to not setting the alarm for 7am and to lingering over breakfast. Add to that the fact that most people need a bit of time after breakfast to get organized for a day's outing. Whether they are taking a train or driving, it gets to be closer to 10am before most vacationers will actually be headed for their daytrip destiantion.

It will work out OK if the attraction of your destination is merely its quiantness, and it is not a town with important church interiors or palazzi, or a town with an interesting museum. But most guidebooks (and Fodor's posters) recommend "day trips" to others precisely on the basis of a town having important art work or historic palaces or museums to see. And the recommendations come without the information about the likelihood of these places being closed Italy during much of what Americans consider "daytime."

Also, reading through annhig's recommended strategy, it jumps out that not only is she proposing a very long day of sightseeing, but most people who end up at 4pm in a town some 90 minutes away from their "base" will want to start driving back to their base by 5 or so, in order to have a moment to rest and freshen up before dinner (and many off-season travelerswill find it more relaxing to be off the road before it gets dark.

So that's why a lot of people visiting Italy will find it much more rewarding to give up on this business of "bases" and stay in the towns they want to see overnight, which better positions them to actually see the things that were the reason they picked the town as a travel destination. If you eliminate the commute, and take advantage of how LATE things are open in Italy (instead of leaving mid-way through the afternoon/evening opening hours), you end up having more hours each day to spend looking at the details.

For people who just want scenic driving and quaint streets to walk around? No problem. People who want to see Italy inside and out? Problem.

zeppole- both you and PalenQ have misunderstood me - the idea is to get the driving done when the attractions are shut, and time ones arrival in the 2nd place as they are re-opening.

of course, if your 2nd pick of the day is 90 mins drive from your base, then you will indeed have a long drive "home". judicious use of a map should solve this problem. and if one is travelling between November and February, it may only be possible to visit one place every day due to ask of daylight.

Personally I find moving from one place to another every day exhausting and frustrating, and I'm not convinced that overall one gets to see any more of Italy "inside and out", than by my method. other posters can of course read our posts and decide for themselves!