We're thinking of doing this, but we're not sure.
They're all places on our list of "must-go places" so we figured since we'll be over that way anyways... why not do it all at once?
Scotland, Ireland, London, Paris, Cologne and Berlin. We're thinking of doing it in 2 weeks. We have friends in Ireland (so we'd want to be there maybe 3 or 4 days) and we have family in Germany (so we'd want to be there for a little bit, although, it's not necessary to be with them the entire time, they're in Berlin, so that's 2 birds with 1 stone.)
How would you split this up? We were thinking of starting in Scotland and then working our way to Germany and flying home from there.
Ideally, how long should we budget for these places? 3 days in Scotland, 3-4 days in Ireland, 2 days in London, 2 days in Paris, and 3 days in Germany? Is this even feasible once you include travel time?
Re: Is this too much travel for 2 weeks?
A couple of years ago, we took 7 days and did 1.5 in Edinburgh, 1.5 in Newcastle (for DH's work) and 4 in London and it wasn't nearly enough time anywhere. I love London, though, and could really spend a full two weeks there (with a couple of day trips to Bath and Oxford). I regret not just spending the extra money and staying for at least 3 or 4 days more. Especially now that polliwog has arrived we won't be traveling internationally any time soon!
I think it depends on your vacation style, too. DH and I like to be able to go at our own pace, and if we had to cram 5 or 6 cities into a short time period it would be tough.
We don't really know what kind of travellers we are. We've been on 2 super fast (long weekend) vacations - and the rest of our "vacations" have evolved around family functions/weddings. So we really don't know what we want.
At first we thought we'd do a week in Scotland and a week in Ireland... but then we started talking about Germany, and then we were like - well, why don't we try to hit London & Paris on the way...
We're in the very very very beginning stages of thinking about this vacation.
We do know that we're mostly sight see-ers. We really could care less about going to the Louvre or something, but taking a cab or renting a car and seeing stuff, rather than doing stuff, is much more our style. We also like to eat. Eating is fun. As is drinking.
We make the rockin' world go 'round.
That's pretty ambitious for two weeks.
We spent three weeks as follows:
DC to Paris (Saturday)
Paris (Sunday?Thursday morning)
Train to Bayeux, Normandy (Thursday morning)
Bayeux (Thursday afternoon?Sunday morning)
Train back to Paris, flight to Munich (Sunday)
Train from Munich to Salzburg (Monday morning)
Salzburg (Monday afternoon?Wednesday morning)
Bus to Berchtesgaden and back (Wednesday)
Train from Salzburg to Munich to F?ssen (Thursday)
F?ssen (Neuschwanstein) (Friday?Saturday)
Train to Munich (Sunday)
Munich (Sunday?Thursday morning), including full day in Dachau
Munich to DC (Thursday)
I know our destinations are different, but this shows how much time was spent traveling. We had overnights in six different hotels and probably had four or so days that were just spent in airports and train stations! We could have done this in two weeks (we were exhausted by Munich)... but your trip has so many more transfers!
London?Scotland is an easy train ride. London?Ireland is an easy flight. London?Paris is a longer chunnel/train ride or a short flight, but once you consider Heathrow and CDG airports... you'll be wasting an entire day there. CDG to Germany was a short flight, but still wasted basically a day. Have you considered overnight trains? Train travel is simple there... you just show up.
Since Ireland and Berlin are essentials (for family/friends), I'd ditch Scotland this time, and maybe even Paris and do Ireland (3-4), London (3), Berlin (Cologne) (3-4). I don't think two days in either Paris or London are worth it. This of course depends on whether you've been before though.
Keep in mind also that not doing round-trip will cost you.
Sounds like fun!!
Scout
Chocolate Blog!
I would do 3 or 4 cities tops, with less than 3 hours of travel in between them. The travel can eat up 1/2 your day, so when you think you have 2 days, you really only have 2 half days. I'd do Germany and France in this trip, and save the other side of the Channel for another trip.
Plus, since you like to eat, when you think in terms of how many dinners you get in each city, it puts way too much pressure on dining for it to be the only place you eat dinner at in a city. I travel in relation to food, so that's just how I think ;-)
You absolutely can do that if you have to. But you'll probably come back exhausted and will feel you 'missed' stuff.
I'd also rec. splitting it into a Scot/Ire/London trip (and include side trips to Bath, etc.) over two weeks time. And if you enjoy driving in a strange place then consider driving from Scot to London. We didn't have time to do that but loved driving around Scot.
I just think you might be too rushed trying to travel, see family/friends/sight see all in two weeks. I'd think about putting one trip off for later. But again - that's my travel style. You may be very comfortable squeezing in the 'highlights only' stuff.
for me, it would be way too much. in 2008, we did a 2.5 week trip to five cities but four of the five locations were in italy so we didn't have much travel time between. i'm not a sit on the beach for two weeks traveler but i definitely like to build in time for wandering, shopping, and of course, wine time. you should also consider jet lag at the beginning. we did pretty well but i've learned what works for me over the years.
you could easily split the trip in half between germany and ireland, maybe fit paris in if you really want to go badly. london and scotland could easily be another two weeks.
i think we spent $5-6K on our trip in 2008 - we mostly stayed in apartments so we could splurge on dinners, sightseeing, and shopping. like julie, our vacations generally revolve around food.
it would be way too much for me too. in 2007 we did just ireland, and not even northern ireland, in 10 days. granted we weren't concentrated in one area (we hit dublin, kilkenny, cork, kenmare, galway) but we still only got about 2 days in each place and a lot of time was spent in the car driving between cities. we could easily have spent another day in each place, and added another few days to hit some of northern ireland.
i think if you want time to see things and not have it just be a whirlwind tour, you should limit to 2 countries. (and even then, know you probably won't see everything you want to unless you never rest)
Really, each transfer means you'll be missing at least half a day when you consider travel time + checking into a hotel. 1.5 days each for London & Paris = a why bother in my mind given that hotels are expensive there. You'll barely get a feel for the city and just feel like you need to go back. If the goal is to see friends/family, then I'd stick with Ireland & Berlin & then decided Scotland OR London OR Paris.
I think at least 3 full days are needed for London and Paris, FWIW. I could easily spend a week exploring a region of Ireland or Scotland. Never been to Germany or Cologne so can't comment there.
I think it's too much. I'd either stick to the British Isles or if Ireland and Germany are your first choices hit those two and maybe one more.
We're much more of a go one place and see it kind of travelers. We were in France for two weeks a few weeks ago and still didn't see everything we wanted to.
My brother did 8 days in Europe last year with his family and regretted trying to squeeze to much in. They hit London, paris, Florence and Switzerland. He said they spent the whole time in airports. Although London to Paris is a one hour flight, it's still an international flight and the airports aren't in the middle of the city getting from one city to the next and through customs took most of a day and they saw next to nothing but airports.