nm123

Which is the best order to travel these cities? I must start in Amsterdam, but should I go to London or Paris first? I will likely fly back to NY from either of the 2 cities rather than go back to Amsterdam. Thanks!

zeppole

Were it me, I would fly to Paris from Amsterdam and take the train from Paris to London.

artstuff

I would start in Amsterdam, take the train to Paris, then the Eurostar to London, then fly home from there.

Robyn >-

rogeruktm

Wow, why not add Rome and Oslo.
Amsterdam to Paris would seem a bit better than Paris to London.

nm123

Thanks for the advice so far!

StuDudley

I'm curious. Are you leaving in ONE WEEK from yesterday, or are you spending 1 week visiting these cities?

Stu Dudley

nm123

Sorry you have a good point! I will be traveling to these cities in the summer of 09, and staying for one week total.

knoxvillecouple

My question would be why would you want to try to cram 3 major cities into one week. Even if that week doesn't include travel days, that gives you at most 2 days in each. Even if you pare it down to 2 cities, that's an awful lot!

nytraveler

If you really must do this, land in Amsterdam, take the train to Paris and then London.

BUT - you will spend at lest a third of your time just traveling - and will have time to see very little in each place.

Is there some reason you can't spend at lest a little more time in each city? Or cut it back to 2 cities? (In a week I would do only one - but I like to not just see 2/3 sights, but really explore a little and get at least a small feel for the city).

StuDudley

Good Grief - re-think your plan. It is STUPID (sorry to be so blunt, it looks like our first trip to Europe 33 years ago)

Pick one:

1. Paris with a day trip to Versailles and another to Rouen. Bet you do neither & just stay in Paris

2. Amsterdam for 2 nights, Paris for 5 nights

3. London with a day trip to York and another to Bath.

What in the world do you plan to do with only 2 days in Paris & 2 in London.

Stu Dudley

dandj2

Author: artstuff
Date: 01/21/2009, 03:14 pm
I would start in Amsterdam, take the train to Paris, then the Eurostar to London, then fly home from there.

Robyn
********
This is exactly as I would do it...

zeppole

I can't believe all the ridiculous outrage about this post. First of all, you might wait to find out why the person is traveling to these cities (ever hear of friends? business?), secondly, even if he/she just wants to take a whirl through some European capitals, what is this dogmatism about travel that says it can never be fun?

I'm especially bewildered by the orders that this poster is only allowed to go to Paris, Versailles and Rouen, or 2 cities max or whatever.

Are any of you paying for this trip?

nm123,

As you might have gathered, most people who travel for pleasure stay longer than you are planning to stay in some of these cities, for some pretty good reasons. If you're new to travel, you may be overestimating how much time you'll have to enjoy these places beyond the glamor dip in such a short time covering so much ground.

My suggestion that you fly from Amsterdam to Paris is based on the ease of getting to the airport in Amsterdam and the fact that a plane flight is a little over an hour, while the train is 4 to 5 hours. But you have to factor in arriving at the airport one hour early, and getting from the Paris airport to the heart of town, so the time savings might be minimal. I still think it's worth it to crunch the numbers.

StuDudley

zeppole - it's late here in San Francisco, and I've had a bit of wine with dinner. However, your advice seems to have some contradictions.

>>secondly, even if he/she just wants to take a whirl through some European capitals, what is this dogmatism about travel that says it can never be fun?<<


>>If you're new to travel, you may be overestimating how much time you'll have to enjoy these places beyond the glamor dip in such a short time covering so much ground.<<


Most of us "Americans" have made the mistake of assuming Paris, London, and Amsterdam are like vacationing in cities in the US - 2-3 days each (NYC may take longer). Most everyone requesting advice on this forum is on vacaton - not business travelers.

Are you really advising the OP to spend 1/4 of their time "in transit", and only 2 days or less in Paris & London???. The OP should work out a daily timetable using realistic travel times (train or air, taxis to the airport during commute times, etc)) and determine how much time they will really have "being there".

If the OP is on a business mission, or visiting friends, my advice does not apply.

Stu Dudley

zeppole

stu,

have another drink and go to bed.

NorCalif

Hi nm123 -

I think trains are the easiest and fastest overall (city center to city center).

The Thalys train between Amsterdam and Paris currently takes just about exactly 4 hours (soon to be only 3 as some tracks are upgraded - not sure if that will happen before your trip or not). No changing trains is necessary.

The Eurostar between Paris and London takes just over 2 to 2 1/2 hours depending on time of day. No
changing trains is necessary. You need to check in at least 30 minutes ahead of time.

So TOTAL travel time to get between all three cities would be about 6 1/2 hours - doesn't seem like a big proportion of a week to me. I say go for it, if that's what you want to do, for whatever reason.

Neither of the train routes is especially scenic, so would be fine to do at night when you won't be able to see much, if that's what fits your schedule. Although depending on when you are here in summer (I currently live in Amsterdam), it will be light till quite late anyway, especially in Amsterdam and London.

I would do Amsterdam -> Paris -> London due to the above ease of train schedules. Although I would also consider what fares you can get out of either Paris or London for going back to NY - if one is considerably cheaper to leave from, I don't think it really makes a lot of difference which order you do the cities in. If you wanted to do Amsterdam -> London by train, you would just have to change to the Eurostar in Brussels, for example, I believe.

You don't say if it is your first time to these cities or not. Two days or so in each city will be short of course, but enough time to still see some amazing things. Two days is better than zero in my book (depending of course on the way you enjoy to travel). I've done whirlwind trips and long trips and enjoy both kinds. Have fun!

DalaiLlama

"Traveling to Amsterdam, London & Paris IN ONE WEEK!"

To this I can only say that I hope it is a business trip and your boss A) pays you a bonus, B) gives you a week off after you get back, and C) you have good health insurance.