[9] Advancements in civil aerospace technology, including high-bypass-ratio turbofan engines, new flight deck systems, aerodynamic improvements, and more efficient lightweight designs were to be applied to the 7X7.

[6] Early 767 customers were given the choice of Pratt & Whitney JT9D or General Electric CF6 turbofans, marking the first time that Boeing had offered more than one engine option at the launch of a new airliner.

[6] The larger wings were designed using an aft-loaded shape which reduced aerodynamic drag and distributed lift more evenly across their surface span than any of the manufacturer's previous aircraft.

[16] The initial 767-200 was designed for sufficient range to fly across North America or across the northern Atlantic,[21] and would be capable of operating routes up to 3,850 nautical miles (7,130 km; 4,430 mi).

[18] Cathode-ray tube (CRT) color displays and new electronics replaced the role of the flight engineer by enabling the pilot and co-pilot to monitor aircraft systems directly.

[18] Despite the promise of reduced crew costs, United Airlines initially demanded a conventional three-person cockpit, citing concerns about the risks associated with introducing a new aircraft.

[29][30] The 767's two-crew cockpit was also applied to the 757, allowing pilots to operate both aircraft after a short conversion course,[20] and adding incentive for airlines to purchase both types.

[31] To produce the 767, Boeing formed a network of subcontractors which included domestic suppliers and international contributions from Italy's Aeritalia and Japan's CTDC.

One of the justification by Boeing: changes to the fuel quantity indication system would require a halt of delivery by three years as production of the 767 model was expected to end shortly.

[42][43] Both models offered a 20 percent passenger capacity increase,[25] while the extended-range version was capable of operating flights up to 5,990 nautical miles (11,090 km; 6,890 mi).

[21] The increased number of cities receiving non-stop services caused a paradigm shift in the airline industry as point-to-point travel gained prominence at the expense of the traditional hub-and-spoke model.

[54] In November 1993, the Japanese government launched the first 767 military derivative when it placed orders for the E-767, an Airborne Early Warning and Control (AWACS) variant based on the 767-200ER.

[58][59] The proposed 767-400X, a second stretch of the aircraft, offered a 12 percent capacity increase versus the 767-300,[25] and featured an upgraded flight deck, enhanced interior, and greater wingspan.

[58] The variant was specifically aimed at Delta Air Lines' pending replacement of its aging Lockheed L-1011 TriStars, and faced competition from the A330-200, a shortened derivative of the Airbus A330.

[62] In 2001, Boeing dropped plans for a longer-range model, the 767-400ERX, in favor of the proposed Sonic Cruiser, a new jetliner which aimed to fly 15 percent faster while having comparable fuel costs to the 767.

[74] To extend the operational lives of older aircraft, airlines increased heavy maintenance procedures, including D-check teardowns and inspections for corrosion, a recurring issue on aging 767s.

However, in early 2018 Boeing Commercial Airplanes VP of marketing Randy Tinseth stated that the company did not intend to resume production of the passenger variant.

Increased gross weight and a tailplane fuel tank would have boosted its range by 5,990 to 6,490 nautical miles (11,100 to 12,025 km), and GE could offer its 65,000–68,000 lbf (290–300 kN) CF6-80C2/G2.

[109] In October 2019, Boeing was reportedly studying a re-engined 767-XF for entry into service around 2025, based on the 767-400ER with an extended landing gear to accommodate larger General Electric GEnx turbofan engines.

[19] Each wing features a supercritical airfoil cross-section and is equipped with six-panel leading edge slats, single- and double-slotted flaps, inboard and outboard ailerons, and six spoilers.

[6][112] The airframe further incorporates Carbon-fiber-reinforced polymer composite material wing surfaces, Kevlar fairings and access panels, plus improved aluminum alloys, which together reduce overall weight by 1,900 pounds (860 kg) versus preceding aircraft.

[126] Subsequently, adopted for all new-build 767s, the Signature Interior features even larger overhead bins, indirect lighting, and sculpted, curved panels.

[40] Resolved issues were minor and included the recalibration of a leading edge sensor to prevent false readings, the replacement of an evacuation slide latch, and the repair of a tailplane pivot to match production specifications.

[42][45] Featuring increased gross weight and greater fuel capacity, the extended-range model could carry heavier payloads at distances up to 6,385 nautical miles (11,825 km; 7,348 mi),[131] and was targeted at overseas customers.

[147] The conversion process entails the installation of a side cargo door, strengthened main deck floor, and added freight monitoring and safety equipment.

[45] The type's increased range is due to extra fuel capacity and higher maximum takeoff weight (MTOW) of up to 395,000 lb (179,000 kg).

[192] On April 15, 2002, Air China Flight 129, a 767-200ER, crashed into a hill amid inclement weather while trying to land at Gimhae International Airport in Busan, South Korea.

[200] On October 28, 2016, American Airlines Flight 383, a 767-300ER with 161 passengers and 9 crew members, aborted takeoff at Chicago O'Hare Airport following an uncontained failure of the right GE CF6-80C2 engine.

[187] On November 23, 1996, Ethiopian Airlines Flight 961, a 767-200ER, was hijacked and crash-landed in the Indian Ocean near the Comoro Islands after running out of fuel, killing 125 out of the 175 persons on board;[205] this was a rare example of occupants surviving a land-based aircraft ditching on water.

The aircraft is devoid of engines or landing gear and has deteriorated due to weather exposure and acts of vandalism but remains publicly accessible to view.