Jack, that article there has two flaws.
First the Shkval torpedo is using a different system in supercavitation as it is actively producing gas for the bubble it is moving in. Same do other such systems (though the Russians were the first to field them - pun: funny to use this term as “field” is really the least place for such systems to be).
Secondly naming the APS and comparing it to what is being done by DSG is a shame as for poor knowledge and technical ignorance.
The APS was the first generation for such (fielded) systems (decades ago) when no other country had a comparable system (we’ll exclude the H&K P11 and the Russian SPP-1M pistols here).
So the shame is that they basically do illustrate the DSG ammunition as superior to the APS which got replaced long ago by the Russians as their current underwater rifle is the ASM-DT which can fire special underwater ammunition and regular ammunition in air (on land).
But not enough! All DSG is doing is using Russian/Ukrainian patents and the Russians have exactly this ammunition fielded already (again). Means they are claiming to do better than the Russians while using Russian developments and sell it off as something else (and being late again).
And as for terminology: “supercavitation” is not a method but an effect! Two different things.
Is this the “new quality” of journalism as we see it so often these days?
Who ever wrote this article did not do his homework.