WRKC935

I mention the rules thing for one reason only.  If it's not brought to to the forefront in the initial discussion, then it will be discussed, debated, and pontificated by a number of folks that may or may NOT have a solid understanding of it and possibly convey partly or completely incorrect info that then needs corrected.  This always seems to turn into a thing, threads get hijacked, dead horses beaten.  It's just a thing that happens with online forums.  Nothing new or exciting, just a continuance of the norm.
Unless you are connecting your .5 watt radio to a 30dBi gain 20 foot dish and purposely creating interference for others I seriously doubt that the FCC is gonna come knocking. 
That being said.  You mentioned both dBi and dBd gain numbers.  Gonna give a quick explanation of each, because it's not common knowledge.
dBi is gain over an isotropic radiator.  This is the default 'paper' reference antenna that radiates RF in all directions at all angles equally.  It's basically a free space radiator that has a sphere of RF eminating from it.  I know that I used a lightbulb as an anology, and it's not quite correct since it can't radiate out the bottom of the lightbulb, but it's a good point of reference for most all other directions. 
dBd is gain over a dipole.  Dipole is simple, and does exhibit gain over an Isotropic radiator since it's pattern doesn't include significant radiation off the ends of the antenna.  That power has to go somewhere, so the increased radiation at certain angles give the antenna some amount of gain over the paper antenna in those directions. 
One of the other interesting things with antenna's an gain as opposed to amplifier gain which of course is an active component of the RF string is the amplifier is typically uni-directional with it's gain.  Take a typical amplifier with a 10dB gain design.  You put in 1 watt and 10 comes out.  This will make you be heard farther than before.  But it does nothing for your receive.  Now, gain in an antenna doesn't so much 'boost' the receive signal.  The signal is what ever it is at the antenna.  Once again, we bring in the light source.  The light isn't brighter for the directional antenna vs the onmi directional antenna.  It's the same level.  I am not going to bore you with math and what is referred to in the big antenna college text books as power density.  I am gonna go back to the simple light source.  So what a directional antenna does to increase your ability to 'hear' a signal is it darkens everything else out other than what it's pointed to.  Take a flashlight outside at noon, you can see it at 100 yards.  But you can't see a candle at the same distance.  There is too much other light source (noise) to see the candle.  But take the same candle out at midnight, and it can be clearly seen as a light source at the same distance.  The directional antenna does this by ignoring the light (signal) from every other direction and only looking at the candle.  A receive amplifier can't do that.  It's going to amplify the signal some, but it's going to amplify all the other signals that we don't want as well.
 
 

OK, first, multiple PL, which is a 'community repeater' isn't illegal.  It has been done in the past and no doubt will continue to be done.  Kenwood repeaters are the way to go here as the Motorola stuff requires a secondary repeater controller.
Benefits to multi-PL is you can have a repeater that is both public (PL #1) and private (PL #2) and be right with the world.  You can communicate via your private PL to your short list of users, and have the repeater open to all users without disturbing you.
Now, stuff I am doing.  Of course we know that hardline is expensive.  Antenna's are too (at least good commercial stuff).  I happened into an 8 port transmit combiner that I converted to two 4 port combiners and then added a hybrid combiner port to it in order to run 2 GMRS repeaters (600 and 675) on the same antenna.  This consisted of two dual isolators, a 50/50 power divider and the existing can in the combiner.  The two repeaters are feeding the two dual isolators, which feed into the power divider (working backwards) and then into the can that feeds the spider going tothe transmit antenna.  That combiner also has a ham repeater at 442.775 feeding it.  the other combiner only has a single GMRS repeater that belongs to the site owner.  There is discussion for additional UHF repeaters to be put at the site for other hams to take advantage of the combiner and antenna heights.  Of course, free or even reasonably priced tower access for a ham / gmrs repeater is a rare thing indeed.
Other 'odd' things that I am doing. 
My repeaters are all 24 volt DC powered.  MTR2000 /3000's are great repeaters, but they share one failure point.  The power supplies in them tend to fail when running them from 110/220.  But the 24 volt power input still works fine in most cases of a supply failure. So I am running a stack of 48 volt to 24 volt buck converters in parallel (old telco gear) that are 40 amps each on the 24 volt output.   With 5 of these in parallel, I have a sizable supply of 24 volt power.
Of course running those does require 48 volts.  That is derived from an ElTek rectifier that has 6 30 amp modules in it and charge and maintain 6 strings 110amp hour batteries.  The 48 volt also runs other microwave equipment and ethernet switches at the site.  Last time I ran the calculations for expected battery capacity based on the load at the time I was at 4 days.   So that's a bit outside the norm.  Not too far, but not typical.
 
I would have to think on the other 'non-typical' things I am doing with the current setup.  While I know how to and have the ability to run receive sites on my setup, I somehow accidentally setup the receive and transmit antenna's in such a way that my coverage both directions is equal on both portable and mobile subscribers.  If you can hear it it will hear you.  So receive sites would actually break that equal coverage thing I have going on. 
Now my control station setup is a bit different that most.  I am running a Motorola MotoBridge system that locates the radios and the gateways at the tower and the 'consoles' at my house via a microwave link to the tower.  I have 2 gateways in active use and 3 more to install and expand the system as needed.  The MotoBridge will allow for direct control of APX/XTL and XPR radios.  In addition I can do tone remote (have a VHF and UHF MTR setup for tone configured as base stations) local control for basic PTT and audio and they will interface to several other radio types that are no longer around. 
I was doing this with a Centracom console system but that was becomeing difficult to deal with and I backed away from that for the time being.
 
 
 

OK, first, multiple PL, which is a 'community repeater' isn't illegal.  It has been done in the past and no doubt will continue to be done.  Kenwood repeaters are the way to go here as the Motorola stuff requires a secondary repeater controller.
Benefits to multi-PL is you can have a repeater that is both public (PL #1) and private (PL #2) and be right with the world.  You can communicate via your private PL to your short list of users, and have the repeater open to all users without disturbing you.
Now, stuff I am doing.  Of course we know that hardline is expensive.  Antenna's are too (at least good commercial stuff).  I happened into an 8 port transmit combiner that I converted to two 4 port combiners and then added a hybrid combiner port to it in order to run 2 GMRS repeaters (600 and 675) on the same antenna.  This consisted of two dual isolators, a 50/50 power divider and the existing can in the combiner.  The two repeaters are feeding the two dual isolators, which feed into the power divider (working backwards) and then into the can that feeds the spider going tothe transmit antenna.  That combiner also has a ham repeater at 442.775 feeding it.  the other combiner only has a single GMRS repeater that belongs to the site owner.  There is discussion for additional UHF repeaters to be put at the site for other hams to take advantage of the combiner and antenna heights.  Of course, free or even reasonably priced tower access for a ham / gmrs repeater is a rare thing indeed.
Other 'odd' things that I am doing. 
My repeaters are all 24 volt DC powered.  MTR2000 /3000's are great repeaters, but they share one failure point.  The power supplies in them tend to fail when running them from 110/220.  But the 24 volt power input still works fine in most cases of a supply failure. So I am running a stack of 48 volt to 24 volt buck converters in parallel (old telco gear) that are 40 amps each on the 24 volt output.   With 5 of these in parallel, I have a sizable supply of 24 volt power.
Of course running those does require 48 volts.  That is derived from an ElTek rectifier that has 6 30 amp modules in it and charge and maintain 6 strings 110amp hour batteries.  The 48 volt also runs other microwave equipment and ethernet switches at the site.  Last time I ran the calculations for expected battery capacity based on the load at the time I was at 4 days.   So that's a bit outside the norm.  Not too far, but not typical.
 
I would have to think on the other 'non-typical' things I am doing with the current setup.  While I know how to and have the ability to run receive sites on my setup, I somehow accidentally setup the receive and transmit antenna's in such a way that my coverage both directions is equal on both portable and mobile subscribers.  If you can hear it it will hear you.  So receive sites would actually break that equal coverage thing I have going on. 
Now my control station setup is a bit different that most.  I am running a Motorola MotoBridge system that locates the radios and the gateways at the tower and the 'consoles' at my house via a microwave link to the tower.  I have 2 gateways in active use and 3 more to install and expand the system as needed.  The MotoBridge will allow for direct control of APX/XTL and XPR radios.  In addition I can do tone remote (have a VHF and UHF MTR setup for tone configured as base stations) local control for basic PTT and audio and they will interface to several other radio types that are no longer around. 
I was doing this with a Centracom console system but that was becomeing difficult to deal with and I backed away from that for the time being.
 
 
 

OK, but lets look at this from the other side of the coin for a minute. 
First is what's required for a linked repeater.  Yes, there is a linking device and some sort of audio interface.  Then there is the medium that is creating the link it self.  This is typically going to be the Internet, but P2P Microwave technology can be used for a closed system with some semblance of redundancy that will deal a failure of the connected Internet.  But you are NOT going to link a system the size of the MidWest group totally on Microwave hops.  The towers are too far away from one another and the Maximum link distances are much shorter than the coverage area of a 2.4 or 5.8 Ghz hop with even the best dishes available.  So to have minimum overlap to conserve frequencies as much as possible, there would need to be intermediary's in those links that didn't have a linked repeater on the tower, only a set of Microwave links to extend the distance enough so there wasn't miles and miles of overlap of repeater coverage. 
But the most important part of the linked repeater system is going to be the repeater it self.  And that is going to be as stable and operable as the power supplied to it, regardless of the ability to link out to the system.  My repeater would fall off the system do to my microwave link failing, but it never went off the air all together.  It just stopped being linked when the link medium would fail.  Now, I provided a second repeater with similar coverage for local access.  I told folks that were local to use that repeater for local conversations and how to tell when their conversations were local via the sound of the courtesy tone on the linked repeaer.  But my point is that my repeater wasn't going to fail because the Internet went down.  So for Emergency communications, it was built out to be better than the public safety system that we have in this county.  And that's still the case. Since I support that ssytem I can tell you how it's powered.  Yes it has generators that are propane with thousand gallon tanks, but the UPS / battery system is only good for about 30 minutes.  So when a tank goes empty, they have 30 minutes to get a PROPANE truck on site to fuel it.  And the links at the sites are powered off that same system.  My battery plant is gonna run my site for 24 hours as it stands right now.  The diesel generator has a 100 gallon tank that I can fill with diesel fuel from any source that has diesel.  The county has equipment there that they have committed to fuel the generator per the tower lease during a major outage (the system there is the backup to the other propane fueled system).  They have a fuel truck and a 20K gallon tank of fuel to feed that delivery truck by.  And they have 24 hours from the time it runs dry until the battery plant goes flat.  So if you are following all this, MY repeaters are backed up better than the statewide public safety communications system.  And if they can't feed it, I have 24 hours to go find fuel (diesel) get it to the site and in the tank before I go off the air.  And I can extend that by turning off other equipment and only running the public safety gear and the GMRS repeaters.  So reliance on my gear is gonna be assured.  Even a full failure of the repeater is only a minor issue as I have cold spares sitting there to be cabled in place and spun up.   And before you ask about the tower failing, anything that will bring the tower down will destroy the building first.  So again, My repeater isn't going to fail.  There are a number of the repeaters on the MidWest system that are solar.  They too will continue to operate without utility power or the Internet. 
Now linking repeaters during a major disaster can be sort of useless, especially if those links cross great distances that are not easily to travel.  If I am having a serious issue in Ohio, people in Wisconsin are not going to either care all that much or be able to provide much in the way of assistance in a timely manner.  Which is the argument I have had about the whole Ham Radio HF communications thing.  We just don't need it.  Local comm's inside and directly outside of the effected zone, sure.  Three states away, not hardly.  But that seems to persist in the minds of the hams for whatever reason.  
So why link at all?  First thing I would say is it provides a way to draw people to GMRS to begin with.  Getting people involved is the first step.  Repeaters with traffic on them will draw more people in than repeaters that are silent.  That goes for Ham and GMRS.  If you link a bunch of them together, a short conversation will turn into a large round table discussion from people in multiple locations.  This breeds extended discussion and radio friendships that frankly bring people together that wouldn't communicate otherwise.  I have met people on the radio that I have now also met in person that are literally hundreds of miles away from me.  Had it not been for linked radio, I would have never met these people.  So there is that as well.  The other thing it does, since it's generating traffic, is it gets locals to recognize each other and builds on the local community of GMRS operators.  That breeds cooperation and brings people together of varying technical back grounds that can assist each other with technical issues, creates study partners and groups for other radio endeavors and license study for them to get ham licenses.  And once those people that are local to each other realize this, and that the repeater they are on will work with out the link when the Internet is down.  They can create groups, look in on each other, and support each other in the event of a disaster.  So while linked repeater in a disaster aren't really a handy thing, unlinked repeaters are.
So, since you brought up the discussion of Long Distance calling.  I am gonna slap you with a history lesson so you know where the moratorium on linking came from to begin with.  If you look back to Class A Citizens radio Service from the 60's and the infancy of GMRS which started in the 70's, you might remember that the telephone company AT&T was the ONLY long distance carrier at that time.  And most any telephone call outside of your local exchange was considered long distance.  Pay phones were also a thing.  So AT&T, concerned with their long distance fee's being circumvented by people linking repeaters lobbied the FCC to disallow linking via the PSTN (Public Switched Telephone Network).  And the FCC obliged them by codifying that in the regulations.  It was done for that reason and that reason alone.  Public safety radio service was mostly done at that time across dry pairs of phone wires and it was a know to work solution.  But public safety wasn't going to be circumventing a long distance bill by doing so.  That's where it originally came from.  The ramblings of the guy in that video proved only one thing, he doesn't know his history.
So how do we move forward?  That's the real question.  The FCC. like any other governmental regulatory body moves very slow if at all on changing anything.  But enforcement efforts on current regulations will change with the federal funding of the body.  If their funds get cut, their enforcement will increase to increase their intake of money.  And the fed's are certainly not the only governmental entities that will increase their enforcement when faced with a financial shortfall.  Every little town and burg when faced with money problems will first and foremost increase enforcement of traffic violations to generate revenue. 
So past that, what COULD be done.  First thing is the FCC doing two things. First is allowing linking by any means.  Requiring that linked repeaters will maintain their operation without the linking medium being present.  Requiring that if you are putting up a linked repeater, that the area that repeater is covering is also covered by another non-linked repeater that has the same usage requirements that the linked repeater has.  Meaning if there is some club fee to access the linked repeater that at minimum that membership is also provided access to the other non-linked repeater.  Second thing is distance between linked repeaters or coverage overlaps.  You are going to want a bit of overlap, but there should NEVER be two repeaters that are linked to the same system that overlap coverage by more than 25%.  Back in the day when you had to use a slide rule and four pencils to calculate the coverage of a repeater, it was difficult to figure out the coverage of a repeater.  Now, it's on line.  You put in the height, power, antenna gain and line loss and it will spit out a map that is reasonably accurate.  No rocket science involved. 
Another possibility is setting aside certain repeaters as the only ones that can be used for linking.  This will address the coverage issue in a different way.  If you only have two or 3 pairs that can possibly be used, then overlapping coverage gets eliminated due to technical issues created by not having your pick of pairs.  If you want to link multiple repeaters, spend the money and simulcast on a SINGLE pair from multiple sites.  Yes, it's possible, yes it's silly expensive, but it's completely doable.  I am not gonna go into what's involved, but Internet links are not gonna be any part of it for the simulcast portion.  And those systems, because of the requirements, will be redundant and high availability.  But, here again the FCC needs to change things. 
Lastly is the FCC once it changes things is it gets back to enforcement of the changes.  Get letters out to people that are violating and get them to cease and desist their inability to follow the rules.  This stuff can be fixed.  We don't need more pairs, we don't need digital radio technology to address these things, we just need a bit of change and a bit of enforcement help to get things going.  And ultimately, GMRS people that find that radio is fun, by default will go get their ham licenses, which generates MORE income though licensing fee's for the FCC bank accounts. 
 

I am assuming that you are running a ham radio type controller on the repeater.  Commercial repeaters, at least the Motorola stuff will hold off on running the ID until the channel is clear and if someone keys during the repeater ID it will stop and allow the traffic to pass and wait.  Mind you that's the IDer that's built into the repeater and is programmed when you setup the other stuff in the repeater.
I know that ham controllers will force the ID on the air.  Some of them will ID at a lower audio level in the back ground, others will just interrupt the traffic.  Of course on HAM radio, the chances of life safety or any sort of priority traffic being interrupted are typically low.  With commercial and of course public safety traffic, it's not that way.
But the cops and firemen don't really need a repeater controller that keys up and voice ID's with time, temperature, city and state location, PL in use, or any of the other crap that hams have announced on their machines.
My machines are all Motorola branded and CW ID from the repeater.  The two that have linking controllers do talk.  The GMRS link machine will announce when it connects and disconnects.  The P25link ham repeater will announce the active talkgroup if certain talk groups it works on when it's keyed for those talk groups.  But even those CW ID with stripped PL because I just don't want to hear it.
Ham's take the IDing every 10 minutes to an extreme level in some cases.  Other hams will get on you, some will even chastise you for forgetting to ID, like it's going to effect them and their license if you get caught not doing it.  GMRS isn't that way that I have seen.  We remind people when we give them permission to access our repeaters to remember to ID properly, but no one is on there playing radio cop demanding that people ID.    Ham unfortunately is that way.  I remember getting  notices from a local OO when that was still a thing not long after I got my ham license.  He was one of those pricks that was mad at the world, the league and the FCC that a no code license had been created.  I had a no code license and he didn't like that at all.  So when he put his OO (official observer) hat, if you were a no code tech, at 10 minutes and 30 seconds, he grabbed his pen and started writing out a notice for you.  And this was to the point that we all thought (the no code license holders) he was autistic or a radio Nazi. 

There is something else that I believe contributes to the GMRS interest exceeding the interest in Ham radio.
That's the persona of HAM.  Ham radio in at least some instances has been portrayed as nerdy.  It's connected to big towers in the yard with big antenna's on top of them.
Have you ever even seen GMRS portrayed in a TV show or film?  If it's radio related, it's always ham.  It's some desk full of radios typically with the operator being some level of eccentric, or otherwise odd socially.  Since GMRS isn't put on display in any fashion, people don't understand it, and therefore don't believe it's going to make other people think they are some mad scientist if they get involved with it.
 

There is something else that I believe contributes to the GMRS interest exceeding the interest in Ham radio.
That's the persona of HAM.  Ham radio in at least some instances has been portrayed as nerdy.  It's connected to big towers in the yard with big antenna's on top of them.
Have you ever even seen GMRS portrayed in a TV show or film?  If it's radio related, it's always ham.  It's some desk full of radios typically with the operator being some level of eccentric, or otherwise odd socially.  Since GMRS isn't put on display in any fashion, people don't understand it, and therefore don't believe it's going to make other people think they are some mad scientist if they get involved with it.
 

It sounds like you are doing range tests from a vehicle.  First issue with a yagi, it's directional.  Please don't be offended if you knew that.  And I am working from an internet post here so I don't 100% understand what's going on.  It doesn't seem like you are trying to take to or hear a specific repeater, but that might not be the case.
Because the yagi is directional it's only going to work good in one direction.  The higher the gain of a yagi, the tighter the front end of it is and the narrower the pattern, meaning a narrower path of coverage. 
Second thing is are you testing from a vehicle with a portable or a mobile radio with a mounted antenna.  Might seem like a silly question, but with all the BS radio distance ratings of radios, if you are new to this and have unreasonable expectations based on what the box or the manufactures advertisements indicate, you certainly will NOT be the first to be dissatisfied with the real world performance.
 

Something to keep in mind.
Ham radio satellites are running 1 to 4 watts. 
Ham radio satellites orbit over 100 miles from the earths surface.  So it has a LOT to do with line of site and less to do with lots of power.
 

Roger beeps interfere with operation,  no, typically not.
DTMF ID, possibly.  Might put a repeater controller in some odd state and lock it up.  Again, possible but not probable.
MDC CAUSING issues?  No, I can't see any way that would happen.  However, there is something called ANI  or RAC that uses an MDC sounding code to access a repeater.  And there are controllers that will look for specific MDC codes that are in a database to allow access to a repeater.  So if you are on a system like that, the MDC is a requirement to access the repeater in question.   Mind you these are not common at all.  But I have seen it both commercially and here on GMRS.
All that being said.  The repeater OWNER is going to have the final say on any of the three being used on their repeater.
A lot of owners don't care for roger beeps.  I am personally one.  If I wanted a courtesy tone on the repeater (roger beep) I can add that myself.
I do support the use of MDC on my repeaters, but don't require it and I don't run RAC / ANI access on my repeater since it's an open repeater.
 

Roger beeps interfere with operation,  no, typically not.
DTMF ID, possibly.  Might put a repeater controller in some odd state and lock it up.  Again, possible but not probable.
MDC CAUSING issues?  No, I can't see any way that would happen.  However, there is something called ANI  or RAC that uses an MDC sounding code to access a repeater.  And there are controllers that will look for specific MDC codes that are in a database to allow access to a repeater.  So if you are on a system like that, the MDC is a requirement to access the repeater in question.   Mind you these are not common at all.  But I have seen it both commercially and here on GMRS.
All that being said.  The repeater OWNER is going to have the final say on any of the three being used on their repeater.
A lot of owners don't care for roger beeps.  I am personally one.  If I wanted a courtesy tone on the repeater (roger beep) I can add that myself.
I do support the use of MDC on my repeaters, but don't require it and I don't run RAC / ANI access on my repeater since it's an open repeater.
 

Well, this sort of nonsense is a result of a non-engaged repeater owner.  As a repeater system user, paid or not, you have no real say in what that repeater carries for traffic.  Ultimately, if you don't like it you can make a comment about it if you choose to but your final say in the matter is when you change the channel or turn off your radio.  You have NOTHING else to do when it's not your gear.  If the repeater owner allows that sort of conduct, then that's how it is. 
But an engaged repeater owner that pays attention to what's going on with his / her repeater should be dealing with that.  Telling people that they are NOT going to argue, cuss and act the fool on the repeater and to either stop or go kick rocks is the way it needs to be handled.  And if they refuse, you shut off the repeater for a while. And the repeater owner can record the traffic, get call signs if the users are actually saying them and file a complaint with the FCC.  If it's a common thing for these people to act up and break the rules (causing interference) then the FCC might get involved. 
But end users really have no say in the content.  And people shouldn't just throw up repeaters that they don't pay any attention to and let others act foolish on them.
 

Well, this sort of nonsense is a result of a non-engaged repeater owner.  As a repeater system user, paid or not, you have no real say in what that repeater carries for traffic.  Ultimately, if you don't like it you can make a comment about it if you choose to but your final say in the matter is when you change the channel or turn off your radio.  You have NOTHING else to do when it's not your gear.  If the repeater owner allows that sort of conduct, then that's how it is. 
But an engaged repeater owner that pays attention to what's going on with his / her repeater should be dealing with that.  Telling people that they are NOT going to argue, cuss and act the fool on the repeater and to either stop or go kick rocks is the way it needs to be handled.  And if they refuse, you shut off the repeater for a while. And the repeater owner can record the traffic, get call signs if the users are actually saying them and file a complaint with the FCC.  If it's a common thing for these people to act up and break the rules (causing interference) then the FCC might get involved. 
But end users really have no say in the content.  And people shouldn't just throw up repeaters that they don't pay any attention to and let others act foolish on them.
 

Well, this sort of nonsense is a result of a non-engaged repeater owner.  As a repeater system user, paid or not, you have no real say in what that repeater carries for traffic.  Ultimately, if you don't like it you can make a comment about it if you choose to but your final say in the matter is when you change the channel or turn off your radio.  You have NOTHING else to do when it's not your gear.  If the repeater owner allows that sort of conduct, then that's how it is. 
But an engaged repeater owner that pays attention to what's going on with his / her repeater should be dealing with that.  Telling people that they are NOT going to argue, cuss and act the fool on the repeater and to either stop or go kick rocks is the way it needs to be handled.  And if they refuse, you shut off the repeater for a while. And the repeater owner can record the traffic, get call signs if the users are actually saying them and file a complaint with the FCC.  If it's a common thing for these people to act up and break the rules (causing interference) then the FCC might get involved. 
But end users really have no say in the content.  And people shouldn't just throw up repeaters that they don't pay any attention to and let others act foolish on them.
 

Well, it's gonna depend on the situation.  The terrain that you are communicating across, the gain of the antenna's at both ends, the height of the antenna's at both ends and lastly the power at both ends. 
First scenario.  Simplex communications between two vehicles since we are talking about using 50 watts.  Antenna heights are roughly the same, and no obstructions between you and the other vehicle.  Yes, there is a difference here, being the distance that stable communications can exist.  You are not limited by the other end being lower, or having less antenna gain.  So it will matter in this specific situation. 
Second scenario, Simplex to a portable (handheld radio).  In this instance the 50 watts is completely useless.  The other end of the conversation has neither the ability to match your power or antenna gain.  Height may be similar, but they are giving up 10dB of signal level (5 watt radio).  They are also giving up an additional 3 to 6 dB of gain or possibly more due to the portable radio having an antenna that has little to no gain.  You will loose the ability to hear them long before they can no longer hear you.  
Third scenario, repeater use, repeater with 200 foot or better antenna height, antenna has gain.  Here is where the power MIGHT have some advantage, but typically not.  For every time you double the height of an antenna you gain 6dB of perceived gain.  It your antenna is at 10 feet (a bit high for a mobile but easier to run numbers) you get to the point that curvature of the earth plays a bigger role in creating an obstruction than the path loss for the distance given.  On flat ground, the horizon due to curvature is 11 miles.  Meaning that LOS or Line Of Site exists at ground level for that distance. Once you are further than that away, the ground becomes the obstruction.  As you raise the antenna up, you regain LOS for a specific distance per 10 foot of height of antenna.  It's not really allowing you to 'see' over the horizon, it actually placing the antenna back into the LOS due to the increased height.  Remember with this, UHF signals travel in straight lines.  Lower frequencies behave differently.  But GMRS is 462/467 so we are staying with that.  The 'path loss' which is the amount of signal loss over a given distance between two antenna's in open air isn't going to be great enough to attenuate the signal of a 50 watt radio before the curvature blocks the signal.  This even applies with antenna's that are significantly higher than 200 feet.  Consider that ham operators operate portable radios with modest gain directional antenna's and communicate with satellites that are hundreds of miles away from them in space.  With 5 watt handheld radios.  SO again, path loss is NOT going to have any effect.  And 50 watts or 500 as you stated, will NOT defeat the ground blocking your signal.
 

doesn't matter
 

What ever..... you win, you're the greatest.
 

Don't be a dick because I know more than you. Quick scanning Grinder, do some research and learn stuff.  Then maybe you will know as much as I do.... but  I doubt it.
You're the one doing GMRS video's.  How about you explain it detail what I was talking about in my post?  I mean that was a really watered down version of how that all works.  You could go into the weeds about how path loss is actually effected by different environments, the amount of expected per city block and how the calculations are done and averaged in a 360 degree plot for a distance specified by the user.  You could explain the time  it takes depending on the granularity of the mapping.  How it's normally only done in 5 or 10 degree increments but can be done in finer increments at the cost of processing time.  That a 10 degree map is averaged and can miss certain things that might block a signal that will show as good on a map.  How the maps that are used for a reference are really important to be up to date so that they will indicate those area's that will have the signal blocked.
You could go into what HAAT (height above average terrain) is and how it effects things.  How the same maps are used for those calculations.  The 6dB realized gain that you get every time you double your antenna height and how radio stations ERP is actually calculated using that information.  There is a LOT that can be discussed with UHF coverage.  Could talk about multipath fading and why moving less than a foot in some instances can get a poor signal full quieting.  Lot's of things to cover. 
But I know Grinder is waiting for you.  SO you go boy. 

Doesn't matter,.  no one needed to know or was curious anyway

Don't be a dick because I know more than you. Quick scanning Grinder, do some research and learn stuff.  Then maybe you will know as much as I do.... but  I doubt it.
You're the one doing GMRS video's.  How about you explain it detail what I was talking about in my post?  I mean that was a really watered down version of how that all works.  You could go into the weeds about how path loss is actually effected by different environments, the amount of expected per city block and how the calculations are done and averaged in a 360 degree plot for a distance specified by the user.  You could explain the time  it takes depending on the granularity of the mapping.  How it's normally only done in 5 or 10 degree increments but can be done in finer increments at the cost of processing time.  That a 10 degree map is averaged and can miss certain things that might block a signal that will show as good on a map.  How the maps that are used for a reference are really important to be up to date so that they will indicate those area's that will have the signal blocked.
You could go into what HAAT (height above average terrain) is and how it effects things.  How the same maps are used for those calculations.  The 6dB realized gain that you get every time you double your antenna height and how radio stations ERP is actually calculated using that information.  There is a LOT that can be discussed with UHF coverage.  Could talk about multipath fading and why moving less than a foot in some instances can get a poor signal full quieting.  Lot's of things to cover. 
But I know Grinder is waiting for you.  SO you go boy. 

Hold on for a minute.... before we start looking at more power, lets look at something else.  Namely your receive signal level.
Is the signal coming from the repeater full quieting and strong or is there noise with it?  Do you have a 'bar' type signal level meter on the radio?  If so is the receive signal full bar's or just one or two?  Increasing power output can correct poor signal to a receiver / repeater, but it does NOTHING for your receive.  And having some sort of obstruction between you and the repeater can NOT be corrected with you increasing power. 
What do you know of this repeater?  Is it a high profile repeater on a tower with 200 foot or better antenna height or is it some mail order antenna built in a piece of PVC pipe 12 feet in the air on somebodies garage? 
Is this the only repeater in your area, or are there others?  If there are others, what sort of performance do you get with those other repeaters?  Are those repeaters closer to you or farther away and are they in the same direction from you or different directions? 
Next question, do you have a metal roof on the house or is it shingle?  You are not going to get signal out through a metal roof.  You would be better off to put the antenna in a corner on the highest floor that wasn't in a metal roof if that's what you have.
 
Point is that 7 miles to a good repeater shouldn't be an issue from a handheld radio.  Even a really cheap one.  I am surprised that you even need an external antenna to talk 7 miles to a repeater.  But since you do, I am wondering why that is and if putting more power in the air is going to solve anything.
 

Something to keep in mind.
Ham radio satellites are running 1 to 4 watts. 
Ham radio satellites orbit over 100 miles from the earths surface.  So it has a LOT to do with line of site and less to do with lots of power.
 

Well, they are indicating that they welcome reporting.  But the reporting they want isn't of the specific violation, rather the act of the violation causing interference to another user.  So it basically reads they don't care unless you are specifically interfering with the operations of another on the frequency. 
Mind you I am not trying to say it's legal through a lack of enforcement, nor will this cause me to put my repeater back on line. 
I just banned from my equipment an entire group that owns and manages a repeater to the east of me due to the actions of another operator.  He decided to send me this long text about an operator that was using their repeater without permission, then causing issues on a ham repeater.  Problem was that I have been friends with the guy he was accusing for over 30 years.  He expected me to get enraged about the situation, so I did.  I banned him, and his group of repeater owner / managers from using my equipment.  And I am about to the point I will be putting up a repeater on a different frequency that will have double the coverage of theirs and try to make daily contacts with the individual that he was complaining to me about, hell I may put HIS call sign on it and turn it over to him once it's operational, just to drive the point home.  And I can do that as long as it doesn't interfere with the operation of their repeater and there isn't ANYTHING they can do about it.  Of course I will not have he laundry list of demands to belong to their group and have access to their repeater either.    Because, yes, I am that guy. 
Problem with banning all those folks is they / he (no names given on purpose) are the type that will turn me in for interference even when none exists.  I have the GMRS repeater with arguably the greatest coverage in the Central Ohio area.  And I am not going to risk, at this time getting a report of causing interference placed on me because I wasn't fair when I banned them from my gear.  And the person that started all this, well it isn't the first time that he's caused issues.  I am pretty certain that he's the one that got all bent a couple years ago when the operator up in the Northwest got drunk and was on the radio.  I believe it was that same individual that contacted me then and ask what I was going to do about an operator that was 3 states away from me operating a radio while drunk.  When my reply wasn't to his liking, he then got mad at ME for not doing anything about the actions of another operator.  So I banned him then and forgot about it.  Since I forgot about it, he got back on and I just let it go.  Then he pulled the latest thing and I banned him and his group from my repeater.  So he got to explain why his entire group got banned from the repeater.  Because, again, I am that guy at times.
 

So basically they are not answering the question and instead asking if you are aware of it causing any interference and then directing you, IF you know of it causing interference to report the INTERFERENCE.  Not that people are doing it, but if the repeaters that are doing it are causing interference by doing it. 
We know that they know that it's being done.  And they seem to be unfazed by that specifically being done and only seem to be interested if it's causing interference. 
I have no idea what the take away is on all thins, but is sounds like they really don't care or are willing to take a stance on it one way or another if there is no interference present due to it happening. 
 
 

First question is how bad is it bent? 
If the tower is bent to the point the leg / legs buckled then you can't fix it.  It has to come down.  At that point you need to figure out the cost to get it down safely.  It's obvious that it can't be climbed in the condition it's in.  Leaving you with few options.  You didn't mention the height of the bend, the direction it's leaning, what it could fall on or what access there might be to get up to it with a bucket truck and crane. 
Give a detailed description here and pictured if you can get them be fore a real discussion can happen.