My opinion:

1. One can’t avoid philosophy when studying for being a scientist. But most of the philosophical underpinnings will be implicit/”hidden”, which is why many scientists may not recognize them as such.

2. It’s not necessary to study the philosophy of science at length in explicit form to become a scientist. It will come “by osmosis”. Practice comes first here, description and analysis of “what is it that the scientists do”, second.

3. Only that philosophy is useful, which deals in strictly logical, structured chains-of-arguments, as opposed to musings, speculations and flights of fancy. And that excludes quite a huge chunk of philosophy.