Sadly the only true fighting tiger piece can’t hang out in India.
One downside here is that the fighters in India are 1 move short of being able to make Moscow in 1 turn, during the culminating battles they are pretty vulnerable if they don’t land with that stack. If the ANZAC fighters defend java or India, Sydney is left vulnerable–the fighters lose their ability to cross back once Japan is between the two Brit powers.
Bombers are always fun to play with and this is a creative idea. It does rely on reacting to your opponent’s J1, which means that if he waits to attack and you are still going with this plan the bombers pile up until they are allowed to move, and you get fewer of them.
If they do J1, I still prefer 10 subs to 5 bombers to try and push them off SZ 6; let them take India while you cripple Japan.
I do see some merit to having two builds worth of bombers at the start of US 4 (5+6?) because that, combined with all the misc ships in the area, gives you the power to strike everywhere but SZ 36 (and you can even strike SZ 36 with just bombers, if they crash in a vulnerable area). The effect of this may be that Japan sees how difficult it could be to take India (with the bombers) and that his fleet is vulnerable to destruction before or after he makes his invasion attempt; this makes the stakes ultra high because Japan has to go to the odds–he may take India but lose his fleet (a win) or decline to press india in the face of the US follow through (a win win). If all the bombers can make India, then his chance to take it may be lost, or seriously impeded. And the point about BM–trading US bomber hits for Chinese partisans is a great idea too.
A certain bovine member of the forum mentioned using the same bomber stream to Moscow, just to create free casualties. Both of these ideas have merit, but the 5 bombers without more can’t threaten the Japanese fleet when its all together, and using them as 5 meager casualties to defend Bombay isn’t inviting either.