Not to jump topics but could ALASA be a strike weapon or a tail chase ABM
Why would it be either of those things? If you want a strike weapon, you design a strike weapon. No need to go through all this trouble to say that you're designing a small satellite launcher and then do something else with it.
And under what scenario would a "tail chase" ABM work? If you're behind the missile you want to shoot down, then you're over the bad guy's territory. Why would you be there? And if you were there, why wouldn't you just be shooting at the missile on the ground?
There's a lot of interest in really small satellites lately. They are usually launched in multiples atop bigger rockets, almost always as ride-along secondary payloads. That makes their launch relatively cheap, but it also puts the secondary at the mercy of the main payload. So for awhile now people have been talking about developing cheap ways to launch small satellites one at a time. ALASA is one effort to do that. We can have our doubts, because for starters an F-15 is not a cheap aircraft to operate. And if you only have one, you have to spread out your cost across all your launches. Thus, if it only launches once a month, you have to charge the entire month's cost to that launch. (And if it only launches once a year, you charge the entire year's cost.)
We'll see if they can make it work. Remember that DARPA is often about trying stuff to see if the technology can work, but it does not have to turn into something that is useful in the end. People remember DARPA's successes, but are often unaware that they fail a lot. DARPA fails a lot at what it tries to do. (Let's repeat that: DARPA fails a lot at what it tries to do.)