APFSDS is indeed the reason why Afghanit is so damn chunky. The story goes is that Soviets first managed to intercept APFSDS back in 1980s with Drozd - original powerful 107mm interceptors just tore APFSDS in half, destabilizing at least the rear part completely and far enough to be consequentual. But it happened only accidentally, as speed was obviously far in excess of designed parameters of the system.
As such, they spent several decades making this performance consistent - and reportedly got it right at a point when it was completely irrelevant. And compromises were so obvious that Afghanit comes in two versions:
- heavy, which is indeed designed to intercept heavy darts, but does so at huge weight, risks and low key metrics against actual threats:
only 180 deg coverage, no top attack intercept, significant operational damage (no, 107mm airburst optimized for pressure wave isn't harmless to tank), significant risks (10 107mm HE shells lie happily on your top armor). And since this is indeed an issue, it comes at x2 weight/volume, as coverage and top attack is covered by a second, integrated but separate soft kill system.
-light, which still keeps compromised performance and can't kill darts(as if it matters, even torn dart will probably tear through light vehicle anyway), but at least provides 360 deg coverage.
It can't intercept top attack, and doesn't have ammo depth extender(by system design every narrow sector can use 2 charges at most).
This probably can be translated at every other APS design - there is no unsolvable magic in calculating intercept point; and electronics work fast enough. The problem is indeed reacting fast enough and damaging the dart enough, it's ultimately a thick heavy metal rod with extreme momentum.
Note that Drozd/Afghanit doesn't spent time neither aiming nor for any trajectory - just shots forward the closest interceptor available. At this point it turned into a pyrric victory: sure, APFSDS is nice, but at what cost? It's a suboptimal horizontal only interceptor, with lots of primary(huge hole in ERA right where it matters), secondary(work damage) and tertiary (threat to own vehicle when hit) damage consequences, yet only 180 deg hard kill coverage.
The only excuse is tbh Armata family itself, all that makes sense in a new heavy chassis with lighter unmanned gunhouse instead of proper turret. They had both the weight/volume margins, which other modern tanks other than type 100 don't, and that thin unmanned turret to defend. On all lighter vehicles - i'd think Russia would rather have GL-6. And even on actual Russian production tanks - it isn't Afghanit, it's Arena-m. No APFSDS fallacy, but covers 360 degrees, does top attack protection and integrates ERA.
TLDR: the point is not whether other APS designs can intercept darts - they can try under right conditions, but they are not designed to. And that is a right choice. I wonder if someone in Soviet/Russian APS design(or military - especially military, overgrown children there is a norm) literally desided to do it b/c it's cool, and no one could or bothered to stop faulty decision over decades.
