European Trip - Flight Question

quote:

---

Sorry for the scrambled thoughts just looking for advice from people who have probably been in this situation before.

---

I have been on many trips similar to yours. I am a solo traveler, have been to all three cities you named, and I would have had no problem easily seeing all I wanted in a 14 day time frame. I would just try to fly really early or late to save the daylight hours.

Flight prices can be very reasonable between those cities and your RT flight from IAH to CDG is very good. I think you’re fine if it’s your goal to see those three cities in one swoop.

You should definitely book the multicity flight, IMHO, starting in London and departing from Rome if possible. Why would you book a multicity ticket and then force yourself to schlep back to Paris?

Rome is the odd choice in this itinerary.....why those three? By air from Paris It’s a 2-hr flight, plus the transit time to the airport, the early arrival, then getting from FCO into Rome (1.5 hrs between clearing airport and arriving in city center). And then you’d do it all again to get back to Paris....If there is a compelling reason you’ve GOT to get to Rome on this trip, I guess. Train is a terrible option between the two unless you’re an energetic 20 year old living out of a backpack (11 hours, with a connection in Milan).

Also, Proposed itinerary is 3 major cities, each ridiculously well endowed with sights, history, activities, museums. You’ve allocated no time to countryside or smaller towns....

I’d split the 2 weeks between England and Paris/Normandy/northern France. Work in some smaller towns, side trips, not all city/mass tourism stuff.

I’d save Rome for another trip (said as a person who has spent more of her time in Rome than any other European capital). Disregard my advice if you have recently received a dreadful diagnosis, or are about to join a cloistered monastic order.

quote:

---

Rome is the odd choice in this itinerary.....why those three

---

I feel like Rome is one of the big premier destinations in Europe and I've always wanted to see the Colosseum. I would take a flight most definitely everything I read said the Train isnt worth it because your going to be traveling in a sleeper car and wont be able to see the countryside anyway.

quote:

---

Also, Proposed itinerary is 3 major cities, each ridiculously well endowed with sights, history, activities, museums. You’ve allocated no time to countryside or smaller towns....

I’d split the 2 weeks between England and Paris/Normandy/northern France. Work in some smaller towns, side trips, not all city/mass tourism stuff.

---

I'm definitely open to allotting some of the time to smaller cites or day trips away from the big cities. I feel like ill spend the least amount of the time in London and use most of the days in Italy and France.

I was thinking of using the days like

5 - France
5 - Italy
4 - London

quote:

---

So for $180, I'd pay that in a heart beat to fly out of Rome home. And I'm cheap fwiw.

---

I cant get out of Rome for 180$ more its about 250-300$ more just to fly out of Rome. It does look like I could start the trip in Rome for about 120$ more and fly out of Paris back to home. So it would be Rome - London - Paris - Home

I’m not a “hurry up to see the next thing” traveler. I prefer a slower pace, with more opportunities for serendipity, wandering, feeling the rhythm of a place, finding good food, good coffee, etc. I hate feeling rushed, or worrying about the next thing. I know, I’m an outlier in this respect. But I’d rather more time in one place than less time in more places. Rent an apartment for a week, settle in, play at being a local. Try it some time, you might like it. Relaxation isn’t just found at a do nothing beach resort.

If you're flying in and out of Paris I'd save Rome for another trip like hungryone said. If you insist on a third city, go with something in the neighborhood like Amsterdam or Brussels/Bruges. Plenty to do and see, and they're much quicker to get to via train. Italy just can't be rushed IMO.
(We loved Luxembourg and the surrounding countryside, but that doesn't sound like what you're after.)

Again, if you are flying into one of those and home from the other, it’s a more logical plan with less time wasted in backtracking and transit. A cheapie flight from Rome to Paris is anywhere from 50€ to 150€ depending on season, timing, etc. You can plan side trips from each city.....

Or a third that's logistically more efficient. Getting to Rome just seems inefficient, hence your original question.

It's not unrealistic to visit all 3 cities in 2 weeks. But you need to understand Paris to Rome is 870 miles, as said that's like going from New Orleans to Chicago, then throw in Detroit.

But flying into Paris makes it make less sense. Some people rarely make it to Europe I don't think there is anything wrong with your 3 cities, you should just do it better or it's going to be a lot more mentally and physically draining.

I would look into a night train from Paris to Rome. No idea on cost and feasibility. But a 900 mile journey seems like a good one to do overnight. Use a night of sleep to travel, one less night in a hotel. When else do you sleep on a train in your life?

I orsonallly wouldn't do that trip probably, but it can be done. Yes, with your given way of doing it it will wear you out. Especially with it being 3 of the largest cities in Europe. It's going to be nothing but public transportation and gobs of people.

Eta: also, you should be able to find a decent priced flight to 2 if not all 3 of those cities. I don't see why you wouldn't be able to fly directly to 2 of them from the USA.