The reason I am asking is that it is much easier to get a 90 day visa. My experience is I've done a few coast 2 coast walks in England they are about 200 miles and quickest I did it in was 8 days I think, It is only 11 of these in a row, no big deal. That was a few years ago. I am much fitter and slimmer now than then. I have done ironman triathlons, 5 mile swims 41 mile ultra runs and a 3:28 marathon in the last few years. While I accept this is different to walking 25 miles day in day out up and down hills with a rucksack, It still makes me far better prepared than when I did those coast to coast walks. So a 90 day visa, a day getting to start and from finish to airport, plus a few zero days. 3 months off work will be much easier to sell to my boss than 5 or 6 months. I've got a good pair of legs on me, I can travel quite light and, touch wood, I don't pick up injuries as a general rule - even when doing 20 hours of exercise a week for ironman training. The AT is something I have wanted to do for 20 years, I will be 40 next January and I fancy doing the Brighton marathon on April 15 then getting a flight to Atlanta on April 16th and then trail day 1 = April 17th. All done and dusted and get a flight back to blighty about July 15th, back in work soon after. Am so excited about it, I am feeling like I might actually do this.

So is this a reasonable aim, bearing in mind most people take a more leisurely 5-7 months.

(Note: The only answer I want to hear is "yes")