If divide through by $t$ and set $s=\frac{1}{t}$ it is the generalized eigenvector problem with matrices $M = A_1 -A_2$ and $A_2$
\begin{align} (tA_1+(1-t)A_2)x &=0 \\ (tA_1-tA_2 + A_2)x &=0 \\ (t(A_1-A_2) + A_2)x &=0 \\ (A_1-A_2 + sA_2)x &=0 \\ (M + sA_2)x &=0 \\ \end{align}
The generalized eigenvector problem does have solutions in general. Could also write it as $(A_2 + tM)\mathbf{x}=\mathbf{0}$
EDIT
I would like to point out that the equation you have is the basis for an argument using continuity (the eigenvalues of a matrix vary continuously with the entries). Look at $t$ at $0$ and $1$.
For $t=0$, the equation is $A_2 x =0$ and the question is if $A_2$ is singular ($x \ne 0$ solves it only for singular $A_2$).
I realize that you are interested in positive $t$, so either consider $t$ very small (and thus consider an approximate solution), or look now at $t=1$. Does $A_1 x = 0$ have a solution?
Now look at $t \to \infty$, in that case $(A_1-A_2)x=0$ is the question.
I would consider Sylvester's law of inertia if the matrices were real symmetric (the theorem is for real symmetric only). It is much easier to find a diagonalized congruence rather than a similarity, and the law states that the inertia is constant under congruency (inertia is the triplet number, number of positive eigenvalues, the number of $0$ eigenvalues, and number of negative eigenvalues). If congruency were preserving the inertia with hermitian (not a theorem as far as I know) then you would look at the inertia of the different matrices from $t=0$, $t=1$, and $t \to \infty$. If their inertia differs, then there is some point at which a positive crosses to be negative, and thus some point of singularity, giving the $t$ at which the equation has a solution.
But since you asked about hermitian indefinite, that is the difference...