European trip ?'s

PTRAVEL wrote:

I'm not disagreeing that it's not possible to pack much lighter than the
average American. Bear in mind, though, that "pack light" shouldn't be a
religion, and there are good reasons why it's not always possible, e.g.
extended trips (3 to 5 weeks), business attire, cold weather, etc.

I agree. I have a Rick Steves' Back Door bag, and usually travel in that and
one additional small bag. This Fall, though, I went to German from September
29 to December 4. As a student of the German language. I needed clothes for
summer temps, my winter coat, boots, plenty of books. I packed relatively
heavy. (I also did laundry weekly). I would not do that on a real trip, here
I was in one place for four weeks at a time, so it was less of an issue. But
on the in between weekends it was murder!

You get my point -- different people have different needs. Over-packing is
unnecessary and a pain, but people need what they need. It's like those
obsessed with budget travel. Sure, it's nice if you eat on 1 Euro a day or
less, but if you don't have to, why would you?

different folks, different strokes.

Exactly.

Finally, as PTravel mentioned, lugging around smaller luggage makes
your train travel and walkabouts to/from hotels much easier and less
stressful. I refer any American traveling to Europe to the hallowed
halls of pragmatic travel guru Rick Steves:
http://www.ricksteves.com/.

Ah, I think I understand. I am definitely _not_ in the Rick Steves school
of world travel. I agree completely with his basic philosophy, i.e. get off
the beaten path, eat local, experience the culture. His approach to
budgeting, though, is not something I would ever do.
i
I'm the same way. I like his philosphy, but I want both my cameras with. I
have invested in a certain amount of travel clothing, which is light, durable,
easily washed and packs small. I am willing to wash, though. But I need
something for the Opera, too.

Quite often, but not always, the touristy crap is very much the real part of
a city or region. Think Florence, for example. The best point Steves
makes, I think, is that there is no reason to be afraid to get off the
tourist path, particularly in Europe. There is, however, a reason why
tourist attractions become tourist attractions. Again, using Florence as an
example, would you really suggest skipping the Uffizi?

I'd re-phrase that to: don't be afraid to stay in B'n'Bs. Big hotels can
very, very nice if they're the right big hotels, and if you travel at the
right time of year, the difference between a luxury 5-star and a budget
3-star can be considerably less than most people think.

Learn enough of the language and
customs to greet people and ask simple questions. (Mea Culpa: my Czech
consisted of 3 words - and I paid the price for my ignorance).

Absolutely! I can't emphasize this enough -- it makes SO much difference if
you can say, "Excuse me," "Thank you," etc. I've found that people the
world over appreciate and enjoy it if you make the effort. It says, "I'm
interested enough in you, your country and culture to learn to be polite in
your language."


One final word for the OP: 10 days is a short trip. I recommend you
spend 5 days in London (with side trips to Bath or Brighton or
Stonehenge or whatever), then take the Channel train for 5 days in
Paris, with a day trip or two from there. Then fly home from Paris.

I agree completely with this suggestion. Taking day trips is one of the
joys of travelling for a few reasons. Aside from getting out of town and
experiencing something different, you get a chance to really immerse
yourself in day-to-day real life of whatever country you visit. In catching
the train or bus, you'll observe lots of little details, some similar, some
different, that are part of the culture that you're visiting.

My wife and I have been travelling together extensively for about ten years.
We find, as time goes on, we want to spend more and more time in a single
place, using it as a base to explore the surrounding environs. Now, we'll
rarely spend less than a week to 10 days in a new city, though we might do
as little as 5 days in one which we've visited often. We find that we
really get a sense of the gestalt of a place by doing this. As an added
bonus, we invariably find a restaurant, cafe, magazine stand, or something
similar, that we like enough to continue going back to and, after a few
days, we become regulars -- it's nice to be greeted as returning friends
when you're in another country.



You'll enjoy the trip more without the endless travel and
musical-chair hotel stays.

Amen! The biggest mistake new travelers make is to forget that a travel day
is, usually, a wasted day. Whether you're travelling by train or plane, it
means packing, checking out, get to the airport or train station, making the
actual trip, getting to the new hotel, checking in, and then getting
unpacked. I don't care how light someone travels, it's exhausting and not
particularly fun.

And when you get home all excited about the
cool time you had, you can crack open the atlas and start planning
your next 10 day, 2 city trip to Europe.

Sing it, brother! Now, THAT's my religion!



- TR
"Dám si jedno pivo prosím." --- too late to properly ask "I'll have a
beer, please..."







--
Julie
**********
Check out the blog of my 9 week Germany adventure at www.blurty.com/users/jholm
Check out my Travel Pages (non-commercial) at
http://www.dragonsholm.org/travel.htm

The Reid wrote:

Following up to PTRAVEL

do you mean you walk on with two bags? A lot of airlines seem to
be pretty strict on hand luggage (increasingly I think).

I've only had problems in Europe on the LCCs (Ryan Air comes to mind) --
I've never had any problem with the major carriers.

I've had a couple insist on weighting them in the last couple of
years.(non LCC in at least one case, IIRC).

To tell the truth, I wouldn't mind if some of the airlines were a bit
stricter. I was on a full NW plane last night from Boston to Amsterdam
where quite a few people had two large carry-ons with them. It wasted a
lot of time in loading the plane IMO, and several of the passengers had
to have the cabin crew check-in some of the bags which wouldn't fit.

Say what you like about budgets like Ryanair and Easyjet, but they can
load a plane quickly!

--
David Horne- http://www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
http://homepage.mac.com/davidhornecomposer http://soundjunction.org

B Vaughan wrote:

On 2 Jan 2006 18:37:12 -0800, "keybdwizrd" wrote:

- Many flights to Europe from the US are overnight flights. Sleeping
difficulties (especially in coach) combined with jet lag can make the
first day or two really rough. If arriving in the morning, book a
hotel room for the night before so that you can check in immediately
upon arrival and try to catch a quick nap.

I disagree with this advice. Taking a nap in the morning is just
setting yourself up for several more days of being on the wrong
schedule. The best thing you can do on your arrival in Europe is stay
outdoors in the sunshine as much as possible and try to go to bed at a
reasonable hour for your new time zone.

I used to swear by this, but I now find that a nap in the early morning
can be wonderful, especially if like me you can't sleep on flights.
Admittedly, I find it only works if I happen to get in very early, and
have a bed- not always guaranteed when you're staying in a hotel with
afternoon check-in times. For me, the most important thing is to get up
as early as possible the following morning. I'm planning on getting up
at around 4.30 tomorrow- that's what I usually do, and it seems to work
in 'knocking' my system back into the local time zone.

--
David Horne- http://www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
http://homepage.mac.com/davidhornecomposer http://soundjunction.org

The Reid wrote:

Following up to Martin

3 days in London, easiest place to start as English spoken, then
Eurostar to Paris, then on to Switzerland (car/train?), so three
places in about 10 days, sounds sensible to me. You dont want
ages in a place you might decide you dont like. Next year maybe
try somewhere "latin", Sevilla, Firenze, Venice?

NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTION: If you are going to use local spelling be
consistent, Mike.

Nah, I'll use what I'm comfortable with, as does pretty much
everybody else.

I think you're missing the point- many people here are comfortable with
vernacular names- doesn't mean they use them when they write in English.
In any case, it doesn't make sense that you Englished Venice, but not
the other two.

With preference for the "real" name is there's a
choice in the front of my mind.

Huh?

--
David Horne- http://www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
http://homepage.mac.com/davidhornecomposer http://soundjunction.org

B Vaughan wrote:

- Many flights to Europe from the US are overnight flights. Sleeping
difficulties (especially in coach) combined with jet lag can make the
first day or two really rough. If arriving in the morning, book a
hotel room for the night before so that you can check in immediately
upon arrival and try to catch a quick nap.

I disagree with this advice. Taking a nap in the morning is just
setting yourself up for several more days of being on the wrong
schedule. The best thing you can do on your arrival in Europe is stay
outdoors in the sunshine as much as possible and try to go to bed at a
reasonable hour for your new time zone.

I have tried it different ways. I cannot sleep on a plane or in any other moving
vehicle. On my first overseas flight I arrived in Paris, got down to Gare Est
and headed to Strasbourg. I went to bed after dinner, slept late the next day
and was jet lagged for several days. On my second trip I arrived in Copenhagen,
caught my second wind while some friends took me for a tour of the island and
delivered me to my hotel. We had a late lunch / early dinner and I went to bed
at 6:30 pm, slept right through the night and got up early the next day feeling
pretty good.

On my last trip, we flew to Hamburg after a short layover in Munich. We drove
about an hour to Lubeck, checked into our hotel and had a short nap, about an
hour. We then went out for dinner, and went to bed around 9am and woke up at 7
am feeling great. I think that was the best option. It allowed us to catch up
on the sleep we missed without ruining the first day entirely.


To achieve this, you should try to sleep as much as possible during
the flight. Skip the movie and try to fall asleep immediately after
the meal service. Do whatever you have to do to fall asleep:
eyeshades, ear plugs, funny inflatable pillows, a glass of wine,
whatever it takes to get a decent night's sleep. It's bound to be too
short on a flight to England, but even five or six hours should be
enough to allow you to get through the first day.

Fine for those who can sleep on the plane. I cannot. It doesn't matter what time
of day or night or the distance and duration of the flight. I just don't fall
asleep if I the thing is moving.

Dave Smith wrote:

Fine for those who can sleep on the plane. I cannot. It doesn't matter what time
of day or night or the distance and duration of the flight. I just don't fall
asleep if I the thing is moving.

Eat a lot-take a memory foam pillow-take an Ambien right after
eating-hydrate like crazy when u awake. Then stay awake until regular
sleeping time when u arrive.
Works for me even after 14 hr Australia flights

Martin wrote:

On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 15:55:33 +0000,
(David Horne, _the_ chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and
prestwich tesco 24h offy) wrote:

I used to swear by this, but I now find that a nap in the early morning
can be wonderful, especially if like me you can't sleep on flights.
Admittedly, I find it only works if I happen to get in very early, and
have a bed- not always guaranteed when you're staying in a hotel with
afternoon check-in times. For me, the most important thing is to get up
as early as possible the following morning. I'm planning on getting up
at around 4.30 tomorrow- that's what I usually do, and it seems to work
in 'knocking' my system back into the local time zone.

Will you stay awake through three episodes of Little Britain this
evening?

Probably! If not, I'll DVD them...

--
David Horne- http://www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
http://homepage.mac.com/davidhornecomposer http://soundjunction.org

Dave Smith writes:

I disagree with this advice. Taking a nap in the morning is just
setting yourself up for several more days of being on the wrong
schedule. The best thing you can do on your arrival in Europe is
stay outdoors in the sunshine as much as possible and try to go to
bed at a reasonable hour for your new time zone.

I have tried it different ways. I cannot sleep on a plane or in any
other moving vehicle.

Life on Starship Earth must just be one long bummer for you, isn't it?

Des

Jens Arne Maennig wrote:
While it's certainly possible to do a lot of one's own research on the
net, one should head stright to a good travel agent when it comes
time to buy international airline tickets. A good travel agent can
get a better price on international flights than any online source.
Buying an international ticket on the internet is a ripoff, even from
the airlines' own websites.

1. For which part of the world should this theory be valid?

It's true for any IATA member airline, which is pretty much all of them. A
consolidator agent has access to lower fares that are simply not available
from any online source or from the airlines directly.

K.

PTRAVEL wrote:
Sorry, but that's not true. Virtually all U.S. airlines have "internet
special" prices that are unpublished and unavailable from travel agents.

And good travel agents have access to even lower fares that are not
available from the airlines directly, or from any other online source.
When I was researching prices for Malev flight 0097 from Toronto to
Budapest last year, my travel agent was able to get me a price much lower
than any website, and several hundred dollars lower than Malev's own
"web-only special."

Travel agents in the U.S. also charge a ticketing fee, as they no longer
earn commissions.

That may be true for domestic flights, but not for international ones
sold under IATA rules.

only -- there are airlines out there I wouldn't fly if they gave me a ticket
for free. However, for leisure travel, I will always book on-line, usually
directly with the airline's website, to avoid the ticketing fee, get the
best price, and have access to the maximum number of alternatives.

You won't get the lowest price on an international ticket from an
airline. IATA-member airlines cannot sell an international ticket for
anything less than the IATA-approved lowest fare. But consolidator travel
agents can undercut that price by rebating some of their commission to
the customer:

"All sales of international tickets on scheduled airlines at less than
official fares are made through travel agencies, not directly by the
airlines, and ultimately depend on rebating of commissions by travel
agents to customers. This is how travel agencies can and do, quite
legally, offer lower prices for international tickets than the airlines
themselves."

See http://hasbrouck.org/faq/#Section_5

K.