Hi Guys,
imo its worth seeing as much as you can in your time scale and covering as much land as possible! But that's just me, Adelaide would also be on my list if your in that direction
Rich
Melbourne itself, as a touristy sight, is worth maybe 4-5 days. It's a very nice city, but its strength lies in how great a place it is to settle down and find a job for a while, not in its attractions. The area around Melbourne is worth spending many weeks at, though. Between the Great Ocean Road, the Grampians, the Dandenongs, Phillip Island, Wilson's Promontory and Lakes Entrance, Melbourne is situated as a perfect base for seeing them all.
The only reason Sydney is the main place to start is that it has by far the busiest international airport. There's nothing inherently better about Sydney as a first place to arrive than Melbourne. If you're only in Australia for a limited time (will be travelling in one direction only; not staying for a year or doing any backtracking or looping around), then starting in Melbourne (or indeed even Adalaide) makes it a little bit easier to do the complete stretch of coastline.
It of course also depends on how much time you have available, and on what time of the year you're there. If you have less than two months, I wouldn't try doing the complete coast, but to pick only a shorter section of it, as it's simply too much otherwise (imagine the distance from the very top of Norway to the very south of Spain) - or pick a few areas and fly between them. And December through March is the wet season up north (Brisbane and further north), which is generally a good time of the year to be somewhere else.
Thanks for the replies guys always nice to hear everyones opinion.
Definitely agree that I'll have to start in Melbourne if I'm going to go there because I don't want to backtrack, got to look into where is a better place to work now between Melbourne and Sydney...
Thanks again
0 Response to "Melbourne???"
Post a Comment