Yes, we had a HUD on the captain's side and it was generally used for Cat IIIa approaches but was approved for en route usage as well. Very useful. The control was on the center console to program the info for the actual approaches. I remember a number of times we used it down to near mins and one time in Paris at CDG where we saw the runway really at mins, which was a 50' DH, based on the radar altimeter. With a regular Cat 1 approach we would not have made it in.

They get really, really thick fog in parts of Europe.

As to the fuel burn question? I honestly don't remember anymore.... But looking at one of my pics I zoomed in. And during climb it was 630 KG/hour on one side and 640/hr on the other. Multiply that times 2.2046 and you'll end up with roughly 1390-1400 lbs per side per hour. That is less than the CRJ, without doubt. Of course, in the CRJ, one covers more ground per hour as well, clouding the issue.

Also, the current fuel savings program we're running at my current company has us pulled back in cruise to some fairly reduced speeds and we're doing burns in the 1100-1200 lb/hour/side range.

So I'm thinking that the CRJ at 50 seats is not really that far off the SAAB2000 when pulled back to econ speeds, and the econ speeds are still at least as fast as the SAAB was at max cruise speed.

There's a lot to the fuel question in my estimation..... Not an easy question to answer, though the SAAB probably ultimately burns less.