Abstract: Brusoni, Prencipe, and Pavitt (2001) posited that the digitization of aircraft engine control systems in the early 1980s caused loose organizational coupling. During this period, the number of control parameters indeed increased significantly with the introduction of full authority digital engine control (FADEC). However, during the period categorized by Brusoni et al. (2001) as the (analog) generation, digital technologies such as analog electronic and supervisory controls were gradually introduced. Moreover, with regard to technological changes in aircraft turbofan engines and control systems, technological improvements in engine power systems were evident in the 1960s and 1970s in terms of the bypass ratio, overall pressure ratio, and turbine inlet temperature. Although engine power systems witnessed negligible technological innovation in the 1980s, control systems improved as the number of control parameters increased due to the advent of FADEC. Subsequently, in the 1990s, great technological strides were made in engine power systems. Hence, technological changes in engine power systems and control systems always occurred alternately. Brusoni et al.'s claim that the decline in organizational coupling was due to the even rate of technological change in engines and control systems or the predictability in their interdependence miss the mark in light of the transition history of engine and control systems.Keywords: analog (hydromechanical), digital, aircraft engine control system, technological imbalance1. IntroductionBrusoni, Prencipe, and Pavitt (2001) categorized aircraft engine control systems from the 1950s to the 1970s as hydromechanical (analog) and those from the 1980s to the 1990s as digital. Brusoni et al. (2001) described the scope for change in the organizational structure and knowledge of three companies1 from the perspective of the evolution of control system technology. However, they barely mentioned the change in control system technology from analog to digital, nor did they focus on the changes in the engine power systems, which are associated with changes in control system technology. Referencing Brusoni et al.'s arguments, this study focuses on the transition of engine control systems from analog to digital and the associated technological changes in the power systems in order to review the technologies analyzed by Brusoni et al.2. Technological Change of Engine Control System:From Hydromechanical to DigitalBrusoni et al. (2001) focused on the control systems of aircraft turbofan and turbojet engines. A turbojet engine comprises an air intake, a fan/compressor, combustion chamber, turbine, afterburner, and tail nozzle. The pilot adjusts the position of the throttle lever to achieve the required thrust. The engine control system provides the necessary thrust by receiving the lever position as input and adjusting the fuel flow, thereby accelerating or decelerating the engine's revolutions per minute (RPM). Furthermore, it confirms whether the thrust corresponds with the pilot's intention and maintains the required thrust levels (Yoshinaka, 2010).Compared with the digital system, the analog system could control only a limited number of items. The following section discusses the evolution of jet engine control technologies based on Endoh (2004), Sugiyama (2004), Sono (2008), and Yoshinaka (2010).2.1. Hydromechanical controlThe jet engine was first adopted as a source of thrust in aircrafts in the 1930s. Simple mechanical fuel controls comprising cams and levers were used in reciprocating engines, which constituted the majority at the time. The control required by jet engines was comparatively complex, and the existing technology was inadequate. Even in the case of early post-war turbojet engines, variables of fuel flow or bleed valve could only be controlled. Subsequently, advances in the level of precision and miniaturization in the areas of mechanics and oil hydraulics led to progress in the control technologies of aircraft engines. …