First time to Italy.

Preliminary plan is to arrive in Rome on Friday morning and spend 2 days there sightseeing. Then to Florence for a day, then Venice for 2 days and then back to Rome (as flight leaves from there).

I know it's a rush, but this can only be a short trip.

Is my plan reasonable?

I arrive on a Friday and leave on the Wednesday.

Would it be better to go to Venice first, then train back to Florence then Rome?

Thank you.

Frankly, I think it's a crazy plan unless your idea of a good vacation is seeing the insides of a rail car. You tell us you have 5 days - but I think you aren't taking into account travel time.

You arrive Friday morning - from where? will you have jet lag to contend with? And it will likely be noon or close to it by the time you get checked into your hotel. So at most your Friday might give you half a day to see a bit of Rome. The you have the next day - one full day in Rome.

From there you go to Florence. You say you have a day here, but I expect what you really have is a night. One night in a place gives you a few hours in the late afternoon/evening and in the morning, but then you have to get on the train for Venice.

Again, you say you have 2 days in Venice, but it takes three nights in a place to yield three full days. So I'm assuming you have two nights in Venice, yielding one and two half days before you fly to Rome to be in place for your flight home the next day.

So out of your "5 days" you might have a day and a half in Rome, small part of two days in Florence, and a day and a two halves in Venice. You'll spend the rest of your time in transit.

If you only have 5 days, spend them in Rome, with a day trip outside of Rome if you get restless.

>>Is my plan reasonable?<<

No . . .

You'll have Friday and Sat. nights in Rome, Sun night in Florence, Mon night in Venice and Tues night in Rome (because you can't be in Venice the same day you fly out of Rome.)

So - it will be 1.5 days in Rome

A bit over half a day in Florence.

Then 1 day in Venice - and Tues evening back in Rome.

>>Would it be better to go to Venice first, then train back to Florence then Rome?<<

That is better, but even then it is too rushed. Pick two of the cities - Rome and EITHER Florence or Venice.

Was posting the same time as kathie -- she was more generous w/ how much useable time you'll have. I do think it will be less 'in real life' . . .

With that amount of time and this your first trip to Italy, I would stay in Rome for the entire time. Checking in and out of hotels is not something I would do three times in 5 days. You could consider a day trip to Florence or Orvieto or Pompeii or Ostia Antica from Rome, but this is a really short amount of time for Rome, let alone these three beautiful cities. On our first trip to Italy, we did 3 nights in Venice and a week in Rome, and still had plenty to see in Rome on trip #2.

My suggestion? Just stay in Rome and, if you feel like it, do a day trip to Florence( just about 1.5 hrs by train). Checking in and out of places takes a long time and eats into your available time

Technically doable but totally insane. Clearly your best bet is to spend the brief time you have in Rome, but if you insist, then do fly into Venice and out of Rome.
Venice is mostly overpriced tourist traps amidst a background of incredible historic significance but worth seeing once. You can do that in half a day, even jet lagged. So fly there, tour a bit then crash. Next morning take an early train to Florence. Stay overnight. Take a Sunday evening train to Rome. Spend Monday and Tuesday seeing (and eating and drinking) whatever you can in Rome before leaving on Wednesday. Book online as much as possible (e.g., Vatican museum) to reduce time spent waiting in line.

Sorry, but your itinerary sounds like a travel nightmare to me. Stay in Rome ... five days is barely enough to see the highlights of what that great city has to offer.

Florence and Venice aren't going anywhere soon. Come back and see them at your leisure.

Florence and Venice aren't going anywhere soon.

Well Venice may sink.

I agree w/ everyone who said one city -- probably Rome -- makes most sense. But if you just want a glimpse . . . then you <i>could</i> squeeze in two. In any case, you don't have time for three cities.

You won't spend 'a day' in Florence. You'll be there for a few hours which is pointless. You may as well see it between Rome and Venice.

Drop your luggage at SMN (the station) visit for a few hours and continue on to Venice.

If you do rush, stop by Siena on the way.

I wonder that your itinerary does not include a daytrip to Amalfi Coast from Rome. It is a must-see.

I agree that it's a bit too rushed, but if you really want to do it, I'd do this:

Friday: take a train straight to Venice and spend two nights there.

Sunday: take an early train to Florence. Leave your bags at the left luggage facility in the station, and spend about five hours having a quick look at the city. Then pick up your luggage and continue to Rome.

You'll have three nights in Rome that way. Don't plan on seeing the "must-see" attractions. Just relax, explore, and plan to come back.

bvlenci, it was a joke.

Traveler, I knew your answer was a joke. I think everyone knows that. My response was completely independent of yours.

No one who has ever asked a question like this has left a trip report afterwards. I suspect that is due either to an attack of sanity before taking the trip or an attack of insanity from the trip.

Revise plans and have a good time!

Actually I once saw a trip report (on Tripadvisor) by someone who had made an even more frenetic trip. She was a young person, and used overnight trains a lot. Often she visited a place during the day and didn't even spend the night. She wasn't just checking boxes, either. A lot of the things she wanted to see and do were a bit unusual or off the beaten path. It certainly took an enormous amount of planning, but she claimed to have enjoyed the trip immensely.

My father was that type of traveler. As soon as he got somewhere, he wanted to be off to the next place. He was also a great one for deciding to take a trip with no planning at all. He would say, "Why don't we go to Niagara Falls?" and then call up some possible trip companions and tell them we were leaving the next day. If he really wanted to go somewhere, he would even take us out of school for a few days rather than wait until we had a school holiday.

No, of course it's not reasonable and surely you already knew that. Just stay in Rome.

I, too, recommend staying in Rome...with maybe a day trip to Florence...but if you insist of Venice, here it is:

Arr: Fri am...arrive Rome...hotel by noon
Fri night - Rome
Sat night - Rome
Sun night - Rome
Mon morning - early Train to Venice...arrive between 11 am and noon
Mon night - Venice
Tue night - Venice
Wed morning - fly home

Very, very, very rushed, but doable:

2.5 days Rome
1.5 days Venice

ssander